Conservatives Who Give a Damn. Who Knew?

February 18, 2014

solarguys

Well, actually, readers of this blog knew.

I’ve reported on the growing number of conservatives who are waking up, (better 30 years late than never) to the benefits of renewable energy, and remembering that independence, community, initiative, competition, and tech innovation were once conservative values, certainly the ones I grew up with, as my father was Chairman of the local County Republicans.

Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, and other states are seeing a grass roots “Green Tea Party” spring up, and it is freaking the heck out of the Koch Brothers, who thought they owned these people.

Not seeing anything here about climate change – I guess science is still a considered an embarrassment in the current version of polite republican company.

Detroit Free Press:

Late last year, Gov. Rick Snyder laid out his energy goals for the state, which include using more renewable energy and becoming more energy-efficient. His announcement came after holding forums across the state and releasing several drafts and final reports on energy-related issues, such as efficiency and renewables in 2013.

By leading on energy, Snyder is paving the way on issues that are important to conservatives: improving national security, protecting public health and creating jobs and opportunities.

This is important, because for too long, conservatives have allowed the debate on energy policy to be dominated by those we consider extreme.

When we look back, conservatives like Ronald Reagan have led our country’s efforts to protect natural resources. Today’s conservatives have solutions to our energy challenges, too, and that’s why we have formed the Michigan Conservative Energy Forum. The forum — intended to provide a space for conservatives to engage individuals, organizations and businesses in the conversation about Michigan’s energy future — believes that an all-of-the-above energy policy must be pursued, including developing Michigan-made clean-energy resources, such as wind and solar, and expanding energy-efficiency programs.

America is dangerously over-reliant on foreign energy. In fact, we spend more than $1 billion on it every day — often sending our money to countries that are hostile toward America and our way of life. No one understands this better than our military — the men and women we place in harm’s way to keep us safe. Using more renewable energy and improving energy efficiency will reduce the amount of fuel we import from other countries. By making the transition to clean, renewable sources of energy here at home, we can reduce our reliance on other nations, improve national security and save lives.

As conservatives, we also believe that it is important to transition to clean-energy sources and become more energy-efficient to cut down on pollution of our air and water and improve public health.

dontread

Michigan gets more than half of its electricity from coal, and the dangerous pollution from coal-burning power plants pollutes our air and water and impacts our health. Pollution from power plants is linked to heart and respiratory disease. It also affects the health and life of the unborn. Transitioning away from coal will protect the health of our kids, families and seniors and helps us to fulfill a core obligation of our faith.

Transitioning from coal to clean energy is pro-business and good for our economy. As I write this, Michigan manufacturers, engineers and scientists are hard at work crafting the next generation of wind turbines, solar panels and fuel-efficient vehicles. Entrepreneurship and innovation are a part of our DNA, and expanding our use of clean energy will build upon our manufacturing strength, talent and know-how, and will allow us to reopen factories and put Michigan workers back on the job.

Energy affects all of us — from homeowners to small-business owners to our manufacturers. I don’t know about you, but I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for Washington to come up with a solution to our energy challenges. If we want to move toward a better energy future, Michigan needs to boldly lead in transitioning away from coal toward clean, renewable energy. It’s crucial that all voices are heard as we engage in this discussion. I welcome conservatives from across the state to join the conversation.

Conservatives have solutions to our energy challenges and contributions to make to the policy debate. It is time we seized the opportunity and took the lead.

Larry Ward is executive director of the Michigan Conservative Energy Forum and former political director of the Michigan Republican Party

Advertisements

53 Responses to “Conservatives Who Give a Damn. Who Knew?”


  1. Don’t look now, but conservative governors like Michigan’s Snyder, Iowa’s Branstad and Green Tea coalition, may force the Obama administration to take renewables more seriously. Obama can ignore his side, but not the other side of the aisle. The game is not over after the election. Not by a long stretch.


  2. Electricity is all well and good (so long as it’s reliable—and THAT is a can of worms) but renewables aren’t going to provide process steam for Dow’s Midland plant.  Currently, it’s effectively fired with (fracced) natural gas.  It’s time to go back to the original concept for co-generating its process steam, perhaps with modular Babcock and Wilcox units.


    • Really?
      http://www.novatecsolar.com/29-1-Process-steam.html
      Google : process steam solar
      Are you pitching slow pitch softball?


      • Do you have any idea what the weather is like in Midland, Michigan?  Ask Dow if their plant can take nights, cloudy days and winters off.


          • You base your claim that Dow Chemical can convert to solar steam for process heat on…

            a MICROBREWERY?!

            HAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahaheeheeheeheehooo……

            I won’t even get into the issues of scale and schedules and everything else, because your choice of what to put forth as “proof” shows that arguing with you can accomplish nothing.  Instead, I am torn between competing explanations for these absurd positions you take:

            1.  You are a deep-cover propagandist trying to make the climate-change community look bad, by providing ridiculous and unworkable policy prescriptions for denialists to point at; an agent provocateur.
            2.  You are just trolling me.
            3.  You really are scientifically illiterate, innumerate, and totally serious about the whole thing, playing it for political support:  Trofim Lysenko writ small.

            #1 would be the best, because uncovering your source of support would get rid of you.  #3 worries me the most, and I find it the most likely because scientific illiteracy seems to be a badge of honor in groups like Greenpeace.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Typicl Ugly-Pot arrogance, condescension, and narcissism, complete with overdone (and therefore insulting) cackling to show us what a complete flaming anal orifice he is.

            HAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahaheeheeheeheehooo……says UglyPot.

            “You really are scientifically illiterate, innumerate, and totally serious about the whole thing, playing it for political support: Trofim Lysenko writ small”?

            All that sounds like something Omno would say—-really rather disjointed and unclear. Lysenko? Really? Quite a stretch there. (and only flaming anal orifice narcissists would append “Trofim”—-for everyone else, Lysenko is enough).

            And in his quest to win friends and influence people, UglyPot finishes with a davburton like “stunning blow”, crushing Christopher with “….because scientific illiteracy seems to be a badge of honor in groups like Greenpeace”. That is one of the most irrelevant, insulting, inane, and just plain stupid things he has ever said. I can only say WHAT? and WHY? to that piece of idiocy.

            PS to Arcus:

            Nice little link, Christopher. Maybe laundromats could do much the same thing as the microbrewery—-they do use hot air, hot water, and electricity, don’t they? Small steps.


          • He has you, his tag-team buddy, deliver some fact-free vitriol while he sits silent.

            Why?  Because he has no response, and he knows it.  There is no comparison between a micro-brewery which can wait for a sunny day to get its hot water for mashing and brewing, and a chemical plant which requires constant conditions 24/7/365.

            He knows it.

            You know it.

            But you keep up the noise-machine anyway.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Tag team? EVERYONE ON CROCK is a member of that tag team, you just haven’t noticed because of your narcissism. You think that your constant doling out of “wisdom” and looked-up-but-misinterpreted knowledge is actually found useful by many of us? I quickly scan and delete nearly all of it, because at my age I don’t have the patience that Arcus has either in sorting through it or attempting to educate you.

            Oh well, I guess I’ve been “tagged” by you, so here it goes.

            “He has you, his tag-team buddy, deliver some fact-free vitriol while he sits silent”. Have no fear. He’ll be back soon enough, poking you with truth and making you squirm. And my “fact free vitriol” is more in the nature of free telepsychiatry, for which you should be thanking me rather than whining about. I spent a professional career dealing with types like you—I want to help.

            And the logic in your retort is amusing. You say “There is no comparison between a micro-brewery which can wait for a sunny day to get its hot water for mashing and brewing, and a chemical plant which requires constant conditions 24/7/365”. Does that mean that beer drinkers will stop drinking beer on “non sunny days”? That microbreweries in areas that are consistently “non sunny” like the Pacific Northwest will serve beer only when its sunny? But you’re probably a wine drinker, and therefore don’t understand beer drinkers, so maybe I shouldn’t be too hard on you there.

            “But you keep up the noise-machine anyway”. YOU are the biggest “noise machine” on Crock, E-Pot. NO ONE posts as much as you and fights so hard to prove his self-imagined superiority and defend himself as much as you do. Why don’t you go find some other site and attempt to be “top gun” there? It’s not happening on Crock.


          • Dig the hole deeper. More solar process heat. I don’t know why this is such a big deal. Its not as if thermal storage was just invented. People have been doing solar hot water for space heating and hot water since the 70s. Big deal.
            http://www.solar-process-heat.eu/fileadmin/redakteure/So-Pro/Work_Packages/WP3/Checklists/Folder_Checkliste_Solare_Prozesswaerme_EN_fin.pdf
            Really. All the fuss about PV and electrical generation misses the point that there is a tremendous opportunity in space heating and process heat.
            “Avatar
            solarisgeothermal • 5 months ago
            In Canada we have solar thermal hybrids, that do space heating/cooling, plus hot water, and PV power from the same panel. The breakthrough is a solar heat pump system that works in all weather and even at night. Imagine, solar heating at night.

            This emerging SunPump technology is able to displace PV panels, taking up only 1/6 the roof space, because there is 6 times more thermal energy wasted by a PV panel than it converts to voltage, and keeping PV cold improves the power. The economics are compelling – in the range of N.G. around $0.04 kW/h.”
            Canada? Isn’t that north of Michigan?
            http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Could-Solar-Heating-and-Cooling-Ever-Catch-Up-With-PV-and-Natural-Gas


          • There is a reason scientists make guarded comments with qualifications, lots of references, and solid peer review. They also make corrections. Thats what makes them more credible. If one does the opposite… Welllll. Then if one pours invectives and abuse… guess what may happen? OK. I will go discuss solar process heat with those with more open minds, but thanks for the motivation to do the research. See trolls do serve some benefit. They spur us to check their cherry picked, extreme, unreferenced, and one-sided opinions with real references and facts. The rest of the discussion about what somebody thinks I said that has nothing to do with what I said or is what someone fantasizes I might have thought…. Who cares? If there is any indication of the presence of a troll, it might be how far off topic we are and how quickly in the thread the topic went to the trolls favorite subject. Is anyone really surprised? 🙂 Gee, he really sounds upset.
            “You base your claim that Dow Chemical can convert to solar steam for process heat on…”
            Find the quote. Never said it.
            “You are a deep-cover propagandist”
            Reading to many cold war fiction novels? Gosh, you got me built up to a giant.
            Has anybody ever seen a human being get cornered for being too extreme and have to fess up, but give a spirited, and irrational self defense instead? Its one of the less nice aspects of human nature that sometimes tones down with maturity. Maybe most people at CC just hang up, but I get a buzz out of the challenge, if its not just some stupid semantic game. Maybe some other cases are not worth pursuing, either. Thats the conclusion I am coming to. My bad. Some people don’t get that compromise makes them more believable, not less.


          • Tag team? EVERYONE ON CROCK is a member of that tag team

            And for all the alleged depth of your bench, not ONE of you can tell me where anyone has taken a fossil-driven electric grid and de-carbonized it (80% reduction or more) by adding today’s subsidized “renewables” (wind & solar).

            You think that your constant doling out of “wisdom”

            This is Climate Crocks.  The concern here is supposedly the climate, meaning anthropogenic greenhouse gases.  Yet you get all upset whenever I bring the discussion around to what is actually working to cut them, and what isn’t.

            One might suspect that people here don’t want to know, they just want to feel good about themselves.  They’ll be dead before the effects of their own actions are felt in earnest.


          • And speaking of which, here comes Arcus again:

            People have been doing solar hot water for space heating and hot water since the 70s. Big deal.
            http://www.solar-process-heat.eu/fileadmin/redakteure/So-Pro/Work_Packages/WP3/Checklists/Folder_Checkliste_Solare_Prozesswaerme_EN_fin.pdf

            Did you even read that brochure?  I’ll quote the first page, with highlights in bold:

            t can be an interesting solution for companies that need process heat at temperature levels below 100° (even better below 50°) during the warmer months.

            So, it’s a fractional-year solution for needs below the boiling temperature of water… preferably well below.

            The Midland Cogeneration Venture supplies 1.5 million pounds per hour of steam to Dow Chemical, 24/7/365.  You think some solar panels are going to run the Dow-Corning plant which is probably the anchor employer keeping Peter in business?  Seriously?

            It’s not going to happen.  You still have me guessing whether you actually believe such nonsense, or if you’re just trying to discredit environmentalism.

            Dig the hole deeper.

            You’re already into magma.


          • Proof of EPs reading from the WUWT play book?
            https://climatecrocks.com/2013/04/

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Yep, and I’ll bet that’s where he came up with the brilliant idea of talking about TROFIM Lysenko.


          • EP – “Electricity is all well and good (so long as it’s reliable—and THAT is a can of worms) but renewables aren’t going to provide process steam for Dow’s Midland plant.”

            Dow Midland – “Dow Corning’s Midland manufacturing site is considering the installation of a biomass-powered energy facility to provide a renewable, reliable and cost-effective supply of steam and electricity necessary for the site’s operations”
            http://www.dowcorning.com/content/news/midland_biomass_plant_dow_corning.aspx?bhcp=1

            Who should we believe? 😉


          • Wow. Dow is heavily committed to renewables at Midland and around the world.
            “MIDLAND — Dow Corning Corp. plans to break ground this summer on a $100 million energy facility in Midland that will burn plant material and wood in a high-tech system designed to greatly reduce emissions.”
            So much for
            “Currently, it’s effectively fired with (fracced) natural gas. It’s time to go back to the original concept for co-generating its process steam, perhaps with modular Babcock and Wilcox units.”

            http://www.mlive.com/midland/index.ssf/2011/03/dow_corning_biomass_power_plant_in_midland_to_reduce_greenhouse_gas_emissions_by_82_percent.html
            http://www.dow.com/energy/answers/

            So summarizing, what do we know? Michigan or even Canada can use renewables to produce process steam for a chemical plant like Dow. All kinds of process heat can be provided from a range of renewables and are doing so worldwide. Large companies like Dow are in the renewable business in a big way, and are committed to using renewables in their own ventures. This is a trend we see with other companies, like Tesla, that plan to use solar and wind combined with their own products, batteries, in the worlds largest, newest battery facility.


          • Reply to the earlier parts of this comment sub-thread here:

            https://climatecrocks.com/2014/02/18/conservatives-who-give-a-damn-who-knew/comment-page-1/#comment-51173

            The pointers to the Dow stuff are interesting, but I notice that there isn’t anything about the Midland Power Station actually being completed or operating.  More in a new comment.


          • And in typical fashion, you didn’t read the other reference that states they implemented a biomethane plan with the city of Midland. Instead of trying to repair your battered reputation with more egoistic nonsense, you should apologies for bad language and admit your mistakes. It’s your choice. Or you can say nothing. Or you can do the worst thing possible and dig the hole deeper. We know the truth now. They don’t get all their methane from fracked sources.


          • I want to make pains to point out that you did admit a mistake on the sodium vs lead cooled reactor. Here is your answer on the Midland Power System. It is to be a 35 MW plant that supplies process steam and electricity to Dow Midland. Between this plant and Dows purchase of landfill methane from the City of Midland, they should be set for methane. The plans site plans for the MPS were approved by Midland City Council. The project was transferred to VC Energy.
            http://www.ourmidland.com/news/midland-city-council-approves-dda-expansion-vc-energy-plant/article_84da1960-ca1f-11e1-acc3-0019bb2963f4.html


        • Why wouldn’t Dow create a plant in the sunbelt that had cheap solar process heat and thermal storage instead? Well the answer is cheap gas for now, but that is partly because of excessive gas subsidies and an exemption from all the water and air pollution requirements that every other energy source faces. So in the end, it has nothing to do with renewables or solar or process heat or anything like that. Just plain old leftover power politics from the Bush era courtesy Dick Cheney and pals. IMO, fracked natural gas is a pretty screwed up bridge. Prognosticators say the future is less rosy for gas, as the Marcellus is the only source not currently decreasing. With those kind of depletion rates, its hard to see the price staying low for the next 20 years. Its shortsighted to view gas as cheap in the long run. Its just another FF ripe for fuel cost increases. Other than that, solar process heat is already here, Dow notwithstanding, and the area is ripe for more. In fact, there is all that residential space heating which is ripe for direct passive solar heating. The world is still wasting or ignoring most of the resources available.


  3. … conservatives like Ronald Reagan have led our country’s efforts to protect natural resources…

    This appears to have been said with a straight face.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Yes, and it’s actually true (if you consider the 1% to be the country’s only “natural resources”). That would make George W. Bush a “leader” too.


      • About A certain power source salesman. He just doesn’t get that the problem is not his favorite power source. It’s his bad manners, lack of social skills, and proverbial bad salesman tactics that invite a boot in the seat. I quote, ” the cheaper the crook, the gaudier the patter.” When discussion turns to debate, then tit for tat, communication is over. I always know when I have made my point. Name calling ensues. The pattern is the same for all. It starts with an unreferenced or badly referenced opinion. Then the goal posts are moved or subject changed. Sources offer contradictions. Then frustration ensues and here comes the last resort. Like clockwork. Although I did stop Cowan in his tracks. What do you want me to do, learn to stutter? He made a 180 degree wrong fact statement and never checked, along with stupid waitress comments. That was an all time record. I am courteous to those who are polite. I feel free to fully embarrass and ridicule those with attitude and bad research. I get complaints, but it keeps getting worse. I almost feel sorry for the salesman… Naw. Did you like the you open your mouth I will help you insert foot comment? I did. It burns me people spouting like cliff from cheers. I don’t like being lied to. After the second time, I get my liar slingshot out.

        • dumboldguy Says:

          I think this ended up in the wrong “reply” spot in the thread. No matter, I think it’s obvious who you’re talking about. You hit the nail squarely on the head with:

          “He just doesn’t get that the problem is not his favorite power source. It’s his bad manners, lack of social skills, and proverbial bad salesman tactics that invite a boot in the seat”. Append what I said about “….arrogance, condescension, and narcissism, complete with overdone (and therefore insulting) cackling….” for a fuller description.

          You shouldn’t let him get under your skin and waste so much of your time. I don’t. I just gently slap him around from time to time to keep him somewhat in touch with reality,


          • Its in the right spot. The stink is getting worse over there. Pretty soon he is going to catch on fire and smoke and disappear like the wicked witch complete with flying monkeys. Actually, I really like the whole solar process heat idea. Its really underdeveloped and storage is not the same kind of issue as electricity. Since electricity is only about 20% of energy, there is a lot of opportunity there. Nobody buys the continuing litany of “there is only one way”. I don’t even buy it from RE people. Inflexible minds intimate other things. Lack of imagination? Creativity? Sometimes ugly morals and prejudices.

  4. climatebob Says:

    There is a real problem with the way that power companies are dealing with the increase in natural energy. With the current price of solar panels it is a good investment to install them and pay next to nothing for power. As thousands of us convert the power companies lose income and also faced with surplus power.
    One of the problems is that we all need the grid because I import power in the early morning and evening and export it during the middle of the day.
    This is the way that it is going and nothing is going to stop it.
    One way out for the electric power companies is to encourage electric transport. If the train system was electrified it would be a whole new huge market and the same is true for public and private transport.
    Instead of fighting the changes they should be embracing the change and chasing new markets.

    • Gingerbaker Says:

      “With the current price of solar panels it is a good investment to install them and pay next to nothing for power”

      Hey, you can’t say that here. Paying next to nothing for power is the same as saying these IS a thing as free lunch. What a fracking heretical thing to say.!


  5. Good news in a field of bad.

    My father was also once a republican. This year, he gave me energy-saver lightbulbs with highest average efficiency ratings. He’s also been voting democrat for at least the past 8 years. Bush soured him and the Tea Party scared the living daylights out of him.


  6. Re-parenting a reply to Farcus and company, comment-page-1/#comment-51134

    I keep getting confirmation for the hypothesis that “Green” is a religious doctrine, not anything to do with environmentalism.

    Take Farcus’ attempt at guilt by association above.  Watts’ style of lying isn’t in mis-statement of fact (most of what he asserts as fact really is, otherwise literally-oriented readers would catch him and stop believing him), it’s his non-sequitur conclusions.  A reasoning person would judge by the standard “is it true?”  Watts says a great many things which are true, which allows him to convince the uninitiated.

    Watts’ job is made a whole lot easier when innumerates, like “Greens”, assert nonsense that he can refute with solid logic.  (This is why I attack the nonsense, hoping people will drop it before the likes of Watts can use it for fodder.  You don’t give ammunition to the enemy.)

    Only a religious fanatic would judge something on the basis of “did a heretic priest ever say the same thing?”  That is the standard you’re using.  That’s both of you, Farcus and DOGgie.

    If you want to actually see what I’ve said about Anthony Watts, here’s a search that will turn up a fair amount.  There’s better, but this 3-year-old comment slamming Watts is probably at about your level of reading comprehension.

    And I think I’ll continue to mention TROFIM Lysenko in the future, just so that nobody else named Lysenko feels uncomfortable… and to watch DOGgie’s Pavlovian response.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      SBAN, E-Pot!


    • So sad. Here is what happened. VC Energy took over the project. It was approved by Midland City Council.
      http://www.ourmidland.com/news/midland-city-council-approves-dda-expansion-vc-energy-plant/article_84da1960-ca1f-11e1-acc3-0019bb2963f4.html
      EP is trying to convince us that his comments lobbing accusations comparing us “Greens” whatever that is, are Trofim Lysenkos. He also wants us to believe that we are like unreasoning religious zealots. And he dismisses the idea that his criticism of renewables might be coming from the same playbook as say, Heartland, or WUWT. Well it is. The Lysenko comment he made is a good case in point. Dumbolduy pointed out others.
      https://climatecrocks.com/2013/04/29/us-congress-and-the-teaparty-lysenkos/
      Nevermind. He’s just steamed because he made the mistake of speaking first, then thinking. He claimed the Dow Midland facility could not get process steam from renewables. We see how that turned out. Wrong. And after hurling invective upon invective, is there an apology for this misbehavior? No. Any change of behavior? No. Unfortunately, there are only two adults left interested in dealing with his emotional issues. He does not seem to get that his behavior is turning every one off to his message and that is the real issue, not the content of his posts.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Make that ONE adult who is really interested, if you were referring to me. I just stir the POT on occasion when his arrogance, narcissism, and overwhelming belief in his own intellectual superiority nauseate me. Rather than literally vomit, I relieve the sickness by commenting. I only scan his “data” any more—he hides truths in a blizzard of BS, and I leave it to you to sort him out there—-I will concentrate on providing tele-psychiatry. support to him

        And I’m still waiting for answers to questions from many threads ago about things like bacterial genetics. But E-Pot doesn’t really answer questions when he has been caught out—he just moves on and spews more BS.

        I wonder what he would do if you and I just stopped paying him any attention? As you say, it seems that we are the only two doing so—-are we his only “friends”?


        • Yup. He’s talking to himself now. You caught his act. You know reasoning is dead when he resorts to childish name calling. Apparently, Peter thinks he has some value, but that may be my fault. He served as the grain of sand that wound up irritating me into researching a pearl. I wound up thoroughly researching Dow Midland and process steam. I could write the next CC on it, if I already have not. The beginnings of this for me was just wanting to know truly what was the situation on renewables. Now I know a lot better than to believe the EIA, IEA, and recognize the FF baloney. We really can have a FF free future and its not that far away. We don’t even need much storage, thats also a part of the FF propaganda myth machine. I get more out of reading your comments, andrewfez, andy, and a bunch of the other good folks on this blog. Its heartening to see how many and so intelligent and diligent.


      • So sad. Here is what happened. VC Energy took over the project. It was approved by Midland City Council.

        and cancelled in 2012 due to “market uncertainties”.  Which didn’t stop you from touting it as a triumph for “renewable” chemical plants.

        I’d say that makes you a liar.  Or clueless, in which case you should question your knowledge and methods.

        EP is trying to convince us that his comments lobbing accusations comparing us “Greens” whatever that is, are Trofim Lysenkos.

        You also adopt the pose that “renewable” ideology trumps facts on the ground, and even physics.  If the shoe fits, wear it.

        He also wants us to believe that we are like unreasoning religious zealots.

        Why can’t you perform the smallest fact check before touting the cancelled Midland biomass plant, or do the most trivial calculation regarding feasibility?  If that’s uncomfortably close to the behavior of religious zealots, hey, I calls ’em as I sees ’em.

        And he dismisses the idea that his criticism of renewables might be coming from the same playbook as say, Heartland, or WUWT. Well it is.

        Using the genetic fallacy for the hundredth time and never, ever asking “is it true?”  FYI, I do not read WUWT except sometimes when a denier links to it (and then I search RealClimate to see WTF Watts was referring to, because they’ve invariably debunked him), and if Heartland says some of the same things I do it’s because their analysts use as much truth as they can.  Unlike Heartland, I’m not being paid to support a particular conclusion so I can use as much of the truth as I can get my head around.  That’s why they are ACC denialists, and I’m all about eliminating the vast bulk of GHG emissions (with specific prescriptions!).

        He claimed the Dow Midland facility could not get process steam from renewables.

        Liar.  I wrote “they’re not going to”, and it’s true:  they’re not.  Neither your 100°C-limited, summer-only solar panels, nor the cancelled forest-burner, are going to produce chemicals in Midland for the foreseeable future.

        We see how that turned out.

        I see how that turned out (cancelled!), because I can read.  What’s your excuse?

        And after hurling invective upon invective, is there an apology for this misbehavior?

        Where’s YOUR apology for accusing me of never correcting myself, when I did it directly to your face?

        Nowhere, that’s where.  Which is why you deserve absolutely zero goodwill.  You do not stipulate to facts, you do not even RESPECT facts:  “renewables” are the answer, no matter the question.  Dogma-maton.  Religious freak, whether you believe it or not.

        Now, what’s your excuse for never, ever answering my question “who’s taken a fossil-based electric grid over 10 GW and effectively de-carbonized it using wind and solar?”  I want an existence proof.


        • Liar? You did not read the other reference that showed city of midland providing methane to Dow. You would not call me a liar or any of the other invectives to my face. Who is the one who spoke first, then checked? You. We all know what that makes you.


          • What’s your excuse for never, ever answering my question “who’s taken a fossil-based electric grid over 10 GW and effectively de-carbonized it using wind and solar?”  I want an existence proof.


        • March 1, 2014 at 10:13 pm
          “Where’s YOUR apology for accusing me of never correcting myself”
          You are too busy talking and not comprehending to listen or read. I already corrected that misunderstanding about the one and only time you admitted a mistake. Perhaps you could make it a habit?
          Christopher Arcus Says:

          March 1, 2014 at 8:25 pm
          0 0 Rate This
          I want to make pains to point out that you did admit a mistake on the sodium vs lead cooled reactor.

          Still no acknowledgement that Dow Midland did gets biomethane from the city of Midland? Did you notice?
          http://www.dow.com/news/press-releases/article/?id=5815
          Turns out the whole state of Michigan is doing lots of bio renewables. Seems like it would be just as applicable in Canada if not more so.
          http://productcenter.msu.edu/uploads/files/Advancing%20the%20Bioeconomy.pdf


          • I want to make pains to point out that you did admit a mistake on the sodium vs lead cooled reactor.

            Thank you, we’re getting somewhere.

            Still no acknowledgement that Dow Midland did gets biomethane from the city of Midland?

            You didn’t read the press release; Dow is not getting methane, it is purchasing electricity derived from landfill gas (waste-to-energy).  Here is the relevant part of the press release:

            The Dow Chemical Company (NYSE: DOW) today announced a power purchase agreement with the City of Midland (The City) and Consumers Energy where natural gas created by the city’s landfill will be used to generate electricity to power Dow facilities

            As of 2011, the landfill gas plants were specified to produce up to 3.2 megawatts of electricity from 2 generators.

            In contrast, the Midland Cogeneration Venture’s gas turbines are rated to produce 1,560 MW of electricity.  The 3.2 MW LFG plant represents about 0.2% of that, and provides no raw material to the Midland plant.

            Can we agree that
            1.  To the extent that waste-to-energy is actually renewable, this is a step forward, BUT
            2.  As actual progress toward de-carbonization of the chemical industry, this is so tiny as to constitute mere greenwashing?


          • No we are not getting anywhere. You are every bit as arrogant and wrong headed as ever. There is no apology from you for reams of invective toward me and no acknowledgment of any of the multitude of other gaffes, mistakes, and outright distortions you have promulgated for a long time. Could Dow use that gas to make process steam? You bet. At this point its academic. I have proved by any shadow of doubt that your assertion of renewables inability to do so is a fable. No, it is not greenwashing. In your ever present crusade to denigrate renewables, there is no pause. You are completely close minded, oblivious to facts, unbalanced, unreliable, impudent, and antisocial. We will be getting somewhere when you apologize for the reams of invective and admit your mistakes, and start behaving with socially acceptable manners. Until then, you are just another troll with an axe to grind and no manners.
            http://biomassconference.crowdvine.com/attachments/0002/7265/Tholo-Doug.pdf
            By the way, there already was a wood fired cogeneration plant that provided electricity and process steam to Dow up until 1996. There is no reason this plant could not have been converted to biomethane from city landfill.
            http://www.nrbp.org/papers/055.pdf
            I long since proved my point that renewables are quite capable of providing process steam for plants as large as Dow Chemical in Michigan and points north. You are still living in a dreamland techno fantasy world of SMRs where everyone treats radioactivity like vitamins, totally oblivious and in denial of the failures of nuclear power.


      • Bah.  One excess link sends it to moderation, where approval may never happen.  Re-posting.

        So sad. Here is what happened. VC Energy took over the project. It was approved by Midland City Council.

        and cancelled in 2012 due to “market uncertainties”.  Which didn’t stop you from touting it as a triumph for “renewable” chemical plants.

        I’d say that makes you a liar.  Or clueless, in which case you should question your knowledge and methods.

        EP is trying to convince us that his comments lobbing accusations comparing us “Greens” whatever that is, are Trofim Lysenkos.

        You also adopt the pose that “renewable” ideology trumps facts on the ground, and even physics.  If the shoe fits, wear it.

        He also wants us to believe that we are like unreasoning religious zealots.

        Why can’t you perform the smallest fact check before touting the cancelled Midland biomass plant, or do the most trivial calculation regarding feasibility?  If that’s uncomfortably close to the behavior of religious zealots, hey, I calls ’em as I sees ’em.

        And he dismisses the idea that his criticism of renewables might be coming from the same playbook as say, Heartland, or WUWT. Well it is.

        Using the genetic fallacy for the hundredth time and never, ever asking “is it true?”  FYI, I do not read WUWT except sometimes when a denier links to it (and then I search RealClimate to see WTF Watts was referring to, because they’ve invariably debunked him), and if Heartland says some of the same things I do it’s because their analysts use as much truth as they can.  Unlike Heartland, I’m not being paid to support a particular conclusion so I can use as much of the truth as I can get my head around.  That’s why they are ACC denialists, and I’m all about eliminating the vast bulk of GHG emissions (with specific prescriptions!).

        He claimed the Dow Midland facility could not get process steam from renewables.

        Liar.  I wrote “they’re not going to” (comment-page-1/#comment-49977), and it’s true:  they’re not.  Neither your 100°C-limited, summer-only solar panels, nor the cancelled forest-burner, are going to produce chemicals in Midland for the foreseeable future.

        We see how that turned out.

        I see how that turned out (cancelled!), because I can read.  What’s your excuse?

        And after hurling invective upon invective, is there an apology for this misbehavior?

        Where’s YOUR apology for accusing me of never correcting myself, when I did it directly to your face?

        Nowhere, that’s where.  Which is why you deserve absolutely zero goodwill.  You do not stipulate to facts, you do not even RESPECT facts:  “renewables” are the answer, no matter the question.  Dogma-maton.  Religious freak, whether you believe it or not.

        Now, what’s your excuse for never, ever answering my question “who’s taken a fossil-based electric grid over 10 GW and effectively de-carbonized it using wind and solar?”  I want an existence proof.


  7. Sayeth Farcus (comment-page-1/#comment-51148):

    Dow Midland – “Dow Corning’s Midland manufacturing site is considering the installation of a biomass-powered energy facility to provide a renewable, reliable and cost-effective supply of steam and electricity necessary for the site’s operations”

    Here’s what Cirque Energy actually says about the project:

    The proposed MPS will be a nominal 675 MMBTU/hour facility with the capability of generating up to 35-megawatts (MW) of electrical energy. In addition, up to 250,000 pounds per hour of low-pressure steam will be provided to the Dow Corning Midland Plant for use in process and building heating.

    Note that the Midland Cogeneration Venture supplies 1.5 million pph of steam to Dow-Corning.  Also note that despite the original completion date of 2013, the Cirque Energy page does not mention anything about operating the plant, or even testing it.  Fact:  even if this plant operates as claimed, the bulk of the energy used at the Midland plant will be from burning fossil fuels (mostly natural gas).  Conclusion:  The Cirque Energy plant is an exercise in greenwashing.

    There is also the issue of supplying the biomass that such a plant requires.  At 17.4 GJ per bone-dry ton, 675 mmBTU/hr of energy requires about 41 tons per hour of dry biomass (more if it’s got significant moisture).  That’s something like a semi-truck full every 40 minutes, 24/7/365; probably in excess of 1000 tons per day.  The burg near me scrubbed a studied biomass-burning electric plant because of traffic issues.  We’ll see how, and if, Dow makes it work.

    Large companies like Dow are in the renewable business in a big way, and are committed to using renewables in their own ventures.

    It’s wasteful to take carbon that nature slowly fixed from the atmosphere and just dump it right back.  We have far better sources of energy that emit NO carbon.  Biomass is better used as a non-fossil raw material, such as for ethylene by dehydration of ethanol.

    Why shouldn’t your polyethylene be made from the air and the rain?  Sequesters carbon, too.


    • NB:  the biomass-burner for Midland was cancelled in 2012 (see elsewhere in this comment thread).


      • Because the city of Midland decided to sell its biomethane to Dow instead. See, you missed the other reference and jumped to conclusions. And you are still wrong. Even if they didn’t, you would still be wrong because I proved your rash statement declaring renewables unable to produce process steam for Dow Midland was wrong. Now I have so thoroughly debunked your rash statement, proving that in fact Dow is getting process steam from renewables. How wrong can you be? You spoke too soon, without checking references. Twice. Well, actually a lot more than that if you include the laundry list of gaffes from the last several months. Something tells me this is not a new behavior. Apparently, you are trying to plumb the depths of your ignorance. Have a nice day.


        • I proved your rash statement declaring renewables unable to produce process steam for Dow Midland was wrong.

          You keep trying to weasel your way around my exact words, which were “aren’t going to”.  It’s not worth the expense to build a pipeline just for landfill gas, or to clean up landfill gas to pipeline quality for injection into the existing network.  And they haven’t.

          proving that in fact Dow is getting process steam from renewables.

          Once again, here is the press release announcing the agreement, which says this:

          natural gas created by the city’s landfill will be used to generate electricity to power Dow facilities in its hometown.

          Not process steam.  Electricity.  The gas probably doesn’t leave the landfill site.

          The Gas to Energy project will initially provide approximately 25 percent of Dow’s energy needs for its Corporate Center.

          Again, not process steam for the chemical plants.  Electricity is fungible, so it isn’t meaningful to speak of a given generator on the grid powering a specific load.  However, since the LFG generators are not producing steam, it is a certainty that no landfill-derived energy is supplying process steam to Dow.

          I’ve explained this to you before, with links to evidence, and you continue to insist otherwise.  I’m quite mystified as to what is wrong with you.  As I wrote elsewhere, you have some SERIOUS cognitive issues.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Uh, E-Pot? Hate to butt in here when you’re having such a nice rant, but when you get a minute, could we go back to discussing bacterial genetics and biochemistry? You have left us hanging there, and is seems that you are being a bit hypocritical when you make demands that you don’t live up to yourself.


          • Typical tag-team tactics.  You can’t address the facts, so you try to change the subject.

            Try sticking to this one, using facts and reasoning from them, to reach a conclusion on this and any closely-related issues.  Agree on them.  THEN move on.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Tag team tactics? I have been standing on the side watching you and Arcus for quite some time now. He has no need to “tag” me, because he’s doing quite well out there on the mat by himself. I read the “stuff’ both of you put out (and often pursue it until I get a headache), and he’s ahead on “science” points in my book, while you are ahead on points for narcissism and general unpleasantness.

            My reason for “butting in” was to point out your hypocrisy—you have a lot of nerve pointing fingers at anyone when YOU so blithely skip away from the places you have been caught out, as with “desmids”. How about also telling us whether your B-H stock is Class A or Class B?


  8. Replying in detail to Arcus again (comment-page-1/#comment-52672):

    No we are not getting anywhere. You are every bit as arrogant and wrong headed as ever.

    <sigh> It appears you’re right, there HASN’T been much (if any) progress.

    I’ll let you in on a little secret:  I have only been doing to you what you did to me from my arrival here.  I first attempted to argue facts with you, only to be attacked using terms like “arrogant” and “wrong-headed”.  (How do you know if you’re wrong-headed unless and until you have examined the relevant facts?  How can someone making false claims legitimately demand humility from someone who has their facts right?  Who owes whom an apology in such situations?)  For instance, did you ever admit that Midland is an impractical site for solar-thermal systems to provide process steam?  After being shown that the brochure you cited didn’t actually claim capabilities sufficient to supply Dow’s needs, did you say “oops”?  Not even that.  You dropped it like a hot potato and went on to another assertion.

    Having failed to get you to use facts and reason, I took you on on your own battleground using your own tactics:  always attack, never rebut, never admit error since there is no payback in goodwill.  It appears that you’re tired of this… but you show no will to change.  Therefore, it won’t.

    There is no apology from you for reams of invective toward me and no acknowledgment of any of the multitude of other gaffes, mistakes, and outright distortions you have promulgated for a long time.

    You have corrected ONE of the falsehoods you’ve claimed about me.  You’ve made dozens more.  I stopped trying to rebut them because you don’t correct yourself or even stop, you simply repeat them.  It was a waste of time.

    When I say you are working for the interests of fossil-fuel companies, that is an objective determination that does not depend on your personal beliefs or intent.  If you have been hoodwinked, you can be working against your own professed goals.  That is not “invective”, that is not “distortion”, that is either true or false.

    One problem is that YOU define “wrong-headed” other than “adherence to facts and conclusions which can be reached from facts using reason”.  I keep testing you with questions like “where has a fossil-based electric grid been successfully de-carbonized using (what you deem to be) renewable energy?”  That is THE issue for the climate… and every time, you go on as if you never saw those words.  Why not?  I’m certain that it’s because you cannot bear to think that you might have been wrong all this time, that you are too deeply invested in the bamboozle.

    So, what’s “wrong-headed” in this context?  Is it advocacy of policies that will fail to solve the GHG problem… or is it anything that violates “green” orthodoxy?  The orthodoxy is demonstrably failing to solve the climate problem and the countries on a course to solve the climate problem are demonstrably not “green orthodox”, so these are disjoint sets.

    Could Dow use that gas to make process steam? You bet.

    Yet Dow is not doing so, so my assertion that they aren’t going to stands with no challenge in fact.  The consideration, then cancellation of the wood-burner stands in support.

    You are completely close minded, oblivious to facts, unbalanced, unreliable, impudent, and antisocial.

    <uproarious laughter>  It took me days to get back to write this reply because I couldn’t stop laughing when I read that.  A few aphorisms:

    “Keep your mind open, but not so open that your brains fall out.”

    “If you keep your mind too open, people will dump garbage in it.”

    “The purpose of opening one’s mind is to close it again on something solid.”

    For you to accuse me of closed-mindedness is hilarious.  You put forth ridiculous claims like rooftop solar collectors being able to run Dow’s Midland operation, and then stalk off in a huff when I quote the specifications back to you and show that they cannot provide steam!  (Probably do well for a microbrewery, though, especially in the summer.  But a brewery is not a chemical plant.)  Whether or not you believe that “solar” is a magic wand you can wave over something to make it “renewable”, that is very close to how you behave… and that is closed-mindedness.  You are such a believer that such things must work that you cannot publicly admit that they cannot, not even when the specifications are posted in response.

    We will be getting somewhere when you apologize for the reams of invective and admit your mistakes, and start behaving with socially acceptable manners.

    We will be getting somewhere when YOU cleave to the SUBSTANCE of civility, which is STIPULATING TO FACTS AND USING REASON.  Otherwise there is nothing but invective.

    Claiming not-facts to be facts is known as “telling falsehoods”.  Knowingly doing so is called “lying”, which is a breach of civility.  Making up whatever you want to be true is known as “BSing”, also a breach.  Willful ignorance is simply a vice.

    If you want to hold out an olive branch, try agreeing that the solar process heat brochure does not in fact describe a system capable of supplying process steam (typically 5-20 PSI gauge pressure saturated steam).

    I long since proved my point that renewables are quite capable of providing process steam for plants as large as Dow Chemical in Michigan and points north.

    If you consider a contribution on the order of 0.2% of total demand to be “providing”.  I cannot recall you ever doing a calculation of the available energy from your favored solution vs. what the application requires.  Note that we need an average of 80% fossil substitution to keep atmospheric CO2 from exceeding 450 ppm, and even that may be 100 ppm too high.  If you’ve ever done such a calculation, link to it and we’ll have something to discuss.  Civilly.

    You are still living in a dreamland techno fantasy world of SMRs where everyone treats radioactivity like vitamins

    I describe what many people actually do… which feeds tourist flows to a number of cities.  Who’s throwing around distortions now?

    totally oblivious and in denial of the failures of nuclear power.

    Nuclear power has the ONLY success stories of de-carbonization of fossil-dependent electric grids (France and Ontario, to name two)… and without overtly trying.  The FAILURES are political and regulatory.

    I’m not sure if you believe that engineers can re-work the weather to supply energy on demand more easily than laws and administrators can be changed, but that’s consistent with your position in exchanges with me.  Whether it’s posturing (dishonest) or actual belief (crazy), it’s completely unproductive.


    • You are so incredibly narcissistic that you do not realize that there is no chance of holding the olive branch out. In fact, there is no need for me to do that. I did not throw invectives at you. In normal, polite, conversation, one does not do that. And yet I have to explain that it is necessary to apologize for such behavior and that the matter of invectives has nothing to do with the content of conversation. When one misbehaves, one apologizes. That is all. There is no waiting for reciprocation. It is a matter of restoring ones own honor. If you don’t like what I say, that’s too bad. In all that long diatribe, there is not a single reference to anything substantive. There is a considerable effort spent in changing the subject. You said “but renewables aren’t going to provide process steam for Dow’s Midland plant. ” improved many times over that your statement is false. You neglected to take into consideration biofuels or other alternatives. As it turns out, there is a large potential for such sources. In your zest to prove yourself right, which seems to be all that matters to you, you completely forgot that it was irrelevant whether Dow went ahead with their plans to create process steam from renewables. The fact that there was a viable plan is proof enough of the falseness of your statement. As dumboldguy pointed out, not only have you dodged away from this statement, but you brought up a much broader argument. Meanwhile, you accused me of changing the subject. As dumboldguy pointed out, you walked away from the topic he challenged you with, and have not replied since. This would be called ” hypocrisy”. I leave it to him to take up the matter with you, and the subject of your hypocrisy and honor.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Life is too short to carry out enough telepsychiatry to “cure” E-Pot. And why do you give me the crappy job? Have you no respect for your elders?

        (I really WOULD love to be educated by E-Pot on desmids and bacterial genetics, though)


        • It goes on forever.
          nmh EngineerPoet • 23 days ago
          From your link, at the end of the article: ” However, we conclude that as the wind power penetration increases, pollutant emissions decrease overall due to the replacement of fossil fuels.”
          2 • Reply•Share ›

          AldivosTarril EngineerPoet • 23 days ago
          The paper does not say what you claim it does re. “diminishing returns”. Are you confused or lying? I suspect the latter because you give yourself away by scare-quoting renewables as though they are not really renewable energy sources.
          http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/08/illinois-clean-energy/


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: