Scientifically Sound Solutions not Palliative Political Pablum

Posted on Sun 08/01/2010 by


By John Droz, Jr

What this translates to is that the policy statement of any true environmental organization should be the following:

1)  We believe that we have serious environmental and energy issues, and

2)  We believe that these matters should be solved by applying the scientific method.

Anything less would amount to promoting a political policy rather than a science-based one. Citizens should insist on nothing less from organizations they belong to.

“Northwest (US) Wind: Problems Aplenty” discusses the issues that all areas will face: <<>>

A very scholarly and comprehensive wind energy analysis is provided by Dr. David Burraston/ Sarah Last (late 2009). This husband and wife team own a farm in Australia and were approached to lease land for a wind development project. They decided to do some research first. This report is what they submitted to their local town: <<$FILE/Submission%2081.pdf>>. They also have a supplement that I can send you if you’d like.

An excellent new report about epidemiology and related health effects due to wind turbines. Written by Dr. Carl V. Phillips MPP, PhD (Harvard), this paper was submitted to the Wisconsin Public Service Commission as testimony on whether turbine noise is having an adverse effect on human health.  Dr. Phillips was recently the Editor-in-Chief for the Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta.   <<>>.

Wind Energy: Too much of a good thing? <<>>.

Green isn’t all it’s cracked up to be is a great overview of the wind energy situation <<>>.

—————The Smartest Grid in the Room is an insightful discussion of the smart grid: <<>>.

That reminds me: a reader asked me to send him prior newsletter articles about the “smart” grid.  Since other newer readers may have missed some of the writeups I mentioned in previous issues, so I’ll repeat them here:
Despite the efforts of many good people, Massachusetts citizens lost some key rights and freedoms recently, when their legislature voted to pass the “Wind Turbine Siting Reform Act” (WESRA). A legal challenge to this is hopefully in the wings.

“Destroying Biodiversity” is a good perspective on environmentalism <<>>.

Son of Cap & Tax” is a well-written article in the Wall Street Journal about immanent and very problematic energy legislation from the US Senate <<>>.
That was followed by a more promising development yesterday <<>>. Not sure where that leaves the RPS proposal, which is the worst element of the whole matter.

Shoddy parts cause problems with offshore wind development <<,1518,702130,00.html>>.

Another NY town joins the chorus in saying no to offshore wind on the Great Lakes  <<>>.
An article about some storage options for wind power. Note the VERY high cost. Our representatives are obligated to be providing citizens low cost reliable power, but  clearly have been blinded by promoting a political agenda instead <<>>.

The Putting Some Balance To It Department —
A tiny glimmer of hope here: DOE reportedly halts funding for East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, citing “scientific doubts”  <<>>.
Eminent physicists (check out their credentials) are skeptical of the global warming hypothesis  <<>>.
Be forewarned! Here is the likely next phase of the global warming madness: it will be re-marketed as a health issue <<>>.
“Is It Time To End Climate Alarmism?” is a good review of the current situation <<–.html>>. And another <<>>.
A good discussion of Science and public relations <<>>. My only quibble is that the authors should have distinguished bad science from bad scientists. The latter is the real problem we are facing.
“Confirmation Bias” <<>>.

The Community Service Department —
Obama’s Inherited Deficit is a thought provoking read <<>>.
Worth viewing: <<>>.

john droz, jr. physicist & environmental advocate