Jesus Rules
October 27th, 2009 by Sonja

Or why I’ve changed my comment policy after 4 years.

Since the last election cycle I’ve picked up a couple of readers from the right side of the spectrum.  At first, I was glad because I enjoy a little political sparring every now and again.  And having been a member of my highschool debate team, I enjoy logical riposte with the best of them.  It can be fun … and funny.  But these folks weren’t in it for fun … or profit.   Nor do the rules of ordinary logic appear to apply to them.  I’m not certain what rules they do follow, but I can’t find logic in any of what they write.

I’ve tried over and over and over again to be polite.  I’ve tried ignoring the snark.  I’ve tried engaging with these commenters using the logic, grace and dignity that I am accustomed to.  None of which has helped anything.  It has only served to further inflame their sensibilities and incur greater ridicule heaped upon me.  So I’ve discovered that in an attempt to not censor them,  I’ve been censoring myself in a pathetic attempt to avoid confrontation.  I’m not going to do that anymore.

From now on, all comments will be moderated.

I will delete out of hand any comments which are intended to engender fear and/or use fear to manipulate the reader.

I will delete out of hand any comments which do not respect the dignity and grace of other readers (to include but is not limited to … me).

I will delete out of hand any comments which violate the rules of logic – see this.

So, I’m done.  I’m going to write and post as I see fit.  If you want to comment, you’re going to have to abide by some rules.  The first one  … Jesus rules here – Love God, Love yourself, love your neighbor … no fear.  Those are Jesus rules.

104 Responses  
  • Shifty1 writes:
    November 25th, 20099:26 pmat

    Being in the ‘biz, so to speak, I do a ton of “light reading” on emerging technologies for weaning us off the fossil teat. I’ve also spent quite a bit of time looking into what can be done right now, versus what can’t. What can’t be done, at least not without forcing the citizenry of industrialized nations to drastically alter their way of life..and not for the better…is, unfortunately EXACTLY what almost every bit of current protocol is calling for. We can’t simply WISH the renewable generation to immediately replace the fossil-fueled kind. The technologies simply aren’t there to make it cost-effective. It would be extremely short-sighted to legislate the replacement of cheap, plentiful fossil-fuel derived energy with expensive, limited and really unproven renewable technologies.

    Let me lay out a few barriers to the IMMEDIATE (or near term anyhow) implementation of “green energy” policies, from a sort of insider’s perspective. First off, as I’ve stated the technology is not advanced enough yet to make most green energy economically feasible to the average consumer. There are TONS of exciting technologies out there, from solar, wind, geothermal, distributed generation, “pocket” nuclear, wave….it’s all being deampt up. Unfortunately, even the two “oldest” technologies, wind and solar, are still not cost-effective. The average consumer cannot afford to install a solar array on their roof (assuming they live in an area where they have enough sunshine to make it feasible in the first place) due to the up-front cost of several tens of thousands of dollars. Individual windmills….will NEVER get past the zoning restrictions, Homeowner Associations and such to be even a possiblity…not to mention cost).

    Another problem with these technologies is one of land use. In order to replace carbon-based technology, the land required for the same generation capacity is enormous. By way of comparison, replacing 300 MW of existing carbon-based generation, which can fit inside a one square mile parcel, with a 300 MW solar generating station requires 9.2 square miles of land. California recently wanted to build a solar power plant in the Mojave Desert, to both help alleviate the energy crisis in that state caused by their OWN short-sightedness (by banning the importaion of any Fossil-Fuel derived generation, California legislators put environmental extremeism over sound public policy) AND meet demands for an expanding “renewable” portfolio. However, the plans were squashed when state and federal legislators (I’ll leave it to you to guess their political affiliation….) expressed misgivings about the project’s requirement for land and possible ECOLOGICAL DAMAGE! Read that again…a solar power plant was NOT built because the politicans were concerned about the damage to the environment it would cause! All this non-sense led the Gubernator to say “If ve can’t build ze zolar plant in ze middle uf ze Mojave Desert, vere de hell can ve build it?”

    This brings up another point….the unappeasablity of the knot-hole rapist. They hate planet killing fossil-fuels, but have successfully blocked or punished solar, wind, nuclear, tidal and biomass replacement technologies. besides the solar plant mentioned above, they have won law-suits against wind turbine farm operators in the Altamonte Pass of the Sierra Nevadas (migratory birds being to dumb to notice the 100 foot tall obstacles and navigate around them), blocked a proposed wind-farm in the Nantucket Sound (The uber-liberal Kennedy clan blocked that one….since all those windmills would interfere with the views and get in the way of their drunken yachting expeditions), registered opposition to developing tidal generation in the sea bed of the coast of Florida, filed suit to prevent (or in some cases curtail) the trial burning of biomass fuels and successfully prevented a SINGLE new nuclear plant from being completed in the US in over 2 decades. You have to ask yourself….what EXACTLY are they after?

    So what do I think should be done? How about pursuing a smart solution? One that does everything possible to PRUDENTLY trim back our reliance on carbon emitting generation, while encouraging the meteoric expansion in renewable technologies. To begin, remove the disincentives to R & D and clean generation construction that are currently in place. If a utility wants to replace dirty coal or oil generation with clean-caol (and yes there is such a thing!), Natural Gas or proven renewable technology, make that investment a lucrative one. Minimze the regulatory hurdles, and block the frivolous lawsuits from the knot-holers. Secondly, incentivize the re-powering of coal/oil plants with natural gas plants. This is an idea that has been proven to reduce emmissions, while simultaneously providing the consumer with more energy for less cost. My company just replaced 450 MW of oil-fired generation with 1600 MW of cutting-edge gas-fired generation, drastically reducing GHG emissions while maintaining the same thermal footprint on the surrounding wetlands and bay. As an interim measure, this makes sense. But only if the process is streamlined, and incentives are put in place to attract the capital required to accomplish the construction. Next, nuclear has GOT to be central in any carbon-reduction scheme. Unfortunately, nuclear construction is currently so cost prohibitive, and fraught with uncertainty that elaborate schemes have to be developed to attract the required private sector investment. Whether these schemes involve government garauntees of ROI, or regulation allowing pre-collection of some of the cost from the consumer..the public ends up on the hook. Much of the hesitancy on the part of investors could be alleviated if the knot-holers could be prevented from delaying/cancelling projects. As it stand, investors NEED the certainty of a garaunteed return on their money, given the track record of the knot-holers.

    Lastly, create HUGE incentives for the development of new sources of energy. By this I mean get teh government out of the way and allow the free market to work. Quit pushing one technology over the other, allow the marketplace to determine winners and losers. Allow companies and entraprenuers who hit on a winning product to collect BIG. Quit propping up failed ideas and enterprises. Think of how much closer we’d be to the Jetson’s flying cars I was promised as a kid if the internal combustion engine hadn’t been protected by the government for so long! And I’m sure you could think of a LOT better use (from the standpoint of energy technology and getting off the oil teat) for the BILLIONS just given to organized labor via the automaker bailout!

    My point is simple. Rather than MANDATING change RIGHT THIS MINUTE!!! under the false pretense of impending global doom, and forcing we humans to adapt to a new, less comfortable life, base energy policy on a wise, thoughtful and well-planned move away from coal and oil and towards more ‘eco-friendly” (ugh I LOATHE that term!) solutions.

  • Janet writes:
    November 26th, 20091:15 amat

    Thanks for sharing all that Shifty; I find all your suggestions really interesting. I can understand why the issue gets you hot under the collar.

    I’m instinctively a little suspicious of conspiracy theories… eg who precisely the “they” are who want a single world government. I think international cooperation on global issues (say poverty, education, clean water, fair trade, brokering peace in conflict situations wherever possible etc.) is a good thing… but it’s hard to think of any country/people that thinks dissolving their borders and identity is a great thing.

    It’s certainly been an interesting chat, round and round the mulberry bush we may have gone, but it’s been a fun dance!

    One of my theological beliefs (thanks to Paul and the Corinthians who squabbled over meat offered to idols) is liberty over matters of conscience. I will endeavour to reduce my carbon footprint as a justice issue… who is my global neighbour)… in case man-made global warming is true. If it is not, so much the better.

    Be blessed as you follow your conscience too.

  • Shifty1 writes:
    November 26th, 20095:39 pmat

    I’m instinctively a little suspicious of conspiracy theories… eg who precisely the “they” are who want a single world government.

    Channelling my inner Mike Myers….

    “the Pentaverate. The Rothschilds, The Gettys, The Queen, the Pope and The Colonel….

    The Colonel dad? Really?

    Aye…the Colonel..with his wee beady eyes!

    What could anyone possibly have against ‘The Colonel’?

    He puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes ya crave it fortnightly…..smarta**”

    THATS who is behind all of the evil in the world!!


    Happy Turkey Day!

  • Janet writes:
    November 27th, 200912:36 amat

    Happy turkey day to you… actually, we Aussies don’t do “Thanksgiving”… we’re generally better at cynicism!

    One of the reasons I am so impressed with American ingenuity is thinking back to the Apollo mission days… getting people to the moon and back (with only 1960’s computing power) was an extraordinary feat, achieved because of sheer determination. Any and every problem was overcome by throwing the best minds (and a lot of money!) at these problems.

    I’m beginning to wonder whether the billions of proposed carbon tax would be better spent on throwing a lot of money at incentives for innovation and working out glitches on promising “cleaner energy” prototypes.

    Not that I’m in charge of the world… (thank the Lord!)

»  Substance:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa