From The Washington Post: Charles Krauthammer-The Fierce Urgency Of Pork

Full article here. (Via RealClearPolitics)

Krauthammer was not impressed with how the Stimulus Package was looking as of Feb 6th:

“The product, which inevitably carries Obama’s name, was not just bad, not just flawed, but a legislative abomination.”

Why?  Because of all the pork.  As for Obama’s idealism, and his request that the American people give him a chance, Krauthammer points out the contradiction between the influence peddling and self-interested politics that Democrats piled on the bill (nothing new there)…

…with the lofty and perhaps naive idealism of their supporters.  But is that all there is to it?

“So much for the president who in his inaugural address two weeks earlier declared “we have chosen hope over fear.” Until, that is, you need fear to pass a bill.”

Apparently so.   He’s not much interested in getting on board the Obama express…:

“I thought the awakening would take six months. It took two and a half weeks.

——————————————–

I have a friend who as the Iraq war publically soured, would periodically look out to the right to see how far away Krauthammer was…

Also On This SiteFrom Bloggingheads: Noam Scheiber And Matt Welch Discuss Obama’s Appeal To George Will And The RightHow Would Obama Respond To Milton Friedman’s Four Ways To Spend Money?Barack Obama President Elect: A Few Hopes From An Independent

Add to Technorati Favorites

One thought on “From The Washington Post: Charles Krauthammer-The Fierce Urgency Of Pork

  1. From: Gerry McDonald. (GerryMcDonald@Comcast.net)
    May 4th 2009
    The Crusade against Carbon Dioxide is WRONG.
    It is widely, but erroneously, accepted that the “Greenhouse Effect,” caused by the increasing amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, is primarily responsible for the Global Warming. That belief is wrong, and its pursuit is a serious waste of financial and political resources.

    The principal cause of Global Warming is “Thermal Pollution.”

    When we drive our car and consume one gallon of gasoline, 113,400 Btu of energy is released. 70% of that energy is dissipated as heat to the atmosphere through the radiator and exhaust pipe (we all know how hot those can get!). The remaining 30% turns the wheels but all of that 30%, in the end, is also dissipated as heat through braking and road friction. The same principle applies to airplanes, power plants, factories, even lighting our homes. All activities that convert fuel to energy cause Thermal Pollution. Every single Btu or calorie that is released from any source ends up causing Thermal Pollution that heats up our globe!

    But is that amount of heat enough to cause global warming ? YES !

    Ø Every day people around the world burn fossil fuels equivalent to 230 million barrels of oil, which releases over 50 quadrillion Btu.
    Ø It is easy to calculate the weight and heat capacity of the earth’s crust, atmosphere and oceans, which are affected by this release of heat.
    Ø Applying basic high school physics reveals that 50 quadrillion Btu will cause a temperature increase of 1.6 F° per century. – very close to the amount of global warming actually observed by climatologists.

    The calculation is attached (page 6) and an Excel spreadsheet that details the full computation in U.S. & metric units is available from :
    GerryMcDonald@Comcast.net.

    (It should be noted that the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration predicted by this approach also corresponds closely to that actually observed every winter at Mauna Loa.)

    The Argument for the Greenhouse Effect.

    The Greenhouse Effect may contribute a little to Global Warming but it is certainly not the principal cause. The Greenhouse Effect is generally illustrated by a diagram (see Wikipedia) showing the incoming Solar Flux and about 10 streams of outgoing reflected radiation. The small difference between these two huge energy streams is the “Greenhouse Effect.”

    The Solar Flux is about 175,000,000,000,000,000 Watts and the total outgoing radiation is a similar amount of heat. The Greenhouse Effect has been estimated to be about 15,000,000,000,000 Watts or only 0.009 % of the Solar Flux. It is generally accepted that when a numerically small value is calculated from the difference between two very large numbers the derived value is uncertain – especially when the values of the large components of the calculation are themselves uncertain. For example the solar output is estimated to vary by 0.1% during a sunspot cycle – ten times more than the greenhouse effect.

    The narratives supporting the CO2 is hypothesis are full of hedges and caveats:
    ….. is believed to be caused by increases in greenhouse gas concentrations.
    ….. the greenhouse effect is one of several factors……..
    ….. methane and other gases are 50 times more potent than CO2 as greenhouse gases.
    ….. The contribution of CO2 to the greenhouse effect is 3.62% of the total.
    ….. water vapor accounts for 95% of the earth’s greenhouse effect.
    ….. physical models for such effects are still too poorly developed.
    ….. estimates must be treated with caution.
    ….. Global consensus on cooling the planet looks maddeningly elusive.

    Much of the support for the Greenhouse Effect is based on mathematical weather models that have not been very accurate in predicting one month, let alone one century, ahead. Eminent experts (Nigel Thomas: “An Appeal to Reason” Gabrielle Walker and Sir David King: “The Hot Topic”) and others have noted “flawed arguments” and the need to “tweak” the data to produce the desired results. Mathematical models, which have to be “tweaked”, are highly suspect. The observed greenhouse effect of about 2F° per century is equivalent to about 15 trillion Watts. One proponent of the CO2 effect estimates that the earth is absorbing 400 trillion Watts which would cause a temperature increase about 28 times greater than observed

    Which hypothesis is correct ?

    Of course neither completely and accurately predicts the observed amount of Global Warming but the calculation of Thermal Pollution is based on basic high-school physics whereas the argument that CO2 is the cause of the Greenhouse Effect strains one’s credulity.

    Indicated Action.

    Thermal Pollution can be reduced 25% – 50% by the use of more efficient autos, trucks, power plants supplemented by solar and wind energy. The technology is developed and our prolific inefficient use of energy provides abundant opportunities. Intelligent conservation will also reduce crude oil imports, improve the U.S. balance of payments, reduce the national debt and greatly contribute to the restoration of our sick economy. In addition the changes required to engineer and produce energy efficient equipment will provide needed jobs.

    Devotees of the Greenhouse Effect do not have to abandon their belief since conservation of any form of energy will reduce CO2 emissions.

    Reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions.

    A possible means of reducing CO2 emissions is by “carbon capture and storage” ie sequestering CO2 underground. Sequestering CO2 can be shown to incur high capital and operating costs to require mines and caverns equal in volume to 3,000 World Trade Center towers each year – not practical. A “Cap and Trade” program for CO2 reduction will only nibble at the worldwide problem and would create a bureaucratic boondoggle comparable to the foreign oil import tickets of 40 years ago. Such programs, if successful, will produce a negligible benefit. The nation’s resources should be directed towards more productive projects.

    Conservation is not merely a sign of personal virtue. It is a necessary and sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy.” Opportunities for conservation exist everywhere and will pay handsome dividends. Such opportunities can generate jobs now and yield economic benefits for the future

    Our Nation’s Credibility can be Restored

    There is a foreign policy implication. Our nation is unpopular for having refused to ratify the Kyoto Accord because it unfairly penalizes the US and its people. Part of that treaty is based on the false assumption that CO2 is the principal cause of global warming. If the United States would enthusiastically embrace the concepts of Thermal Pollution and Intelligent Conservation we would have a scientific, non-political, basis for our rejection of Kyoto and the opportunity to present realistic alternative solutions and targets. These would benefit both the developed and the developing nations. Instead of being a weak spectator, the U.S. could regain its credibility as a world leader.

    We should abandon our belief that CO2 is the principal cause of the Greenhouse Effect ! The forthcoming U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen environmental conference will presents the U.S. with an opportunity to take the lead in the second (2012 to 2016) Kyoto period and recover our nation’s credibility and prestige.

    Gerry McDonald

    Author: G. W. G. McDonald.
    GerryMcDonald@Comcast.net (941) 346 2555
    5780 Midnight Pass Rd.
    Suite 401-B
    Sarasota,
    FL 34242-3054

    1/5/09
    If the email system butchers this spreadsheet request copy from GerryMcDonald@Comcast.net

    EVEN BEETLE GETS IT !

Leave a Reply to Gerry McDonald Cancel reply