Advertisement. Advertise with us

IF FUNDED, IT WON’T WORK

Where’s $93 Trillion

Coming From To

Pay Bill For A Green

New Deal?

I was struck by a news clip showing Elizabeth Warren speaking to a crowd and telling them we need to remove the control over our lives from government and put it back into the hands of the people. This
is the same woman who is supporting Bernie in his call for socialism.
Socialism is a system based on government control over the “people.” After all, some entity has to decide who gets to keep their wealth and who doesn’t. Guess who would get to keep it.
This call for returning control to  the “people,” that’s you and me,
comes at a time when liberals are calling for government-controlled healthcare for all at a cost of $32 trillion over 10 years, while taking healthcare choices away from the 150 million plus Americans who presently have health care and “The Green New Deal” (GND) with an undetermined cost (somewhere in excess of $93 trillion, $600,000 per household) without including the adverse impact to our economy.

Before getting into the specifics of the GND, let’s take a look at the numbers. Our current national debt is about $22 trillion – not including about $60 trillion in unfunded pensions. If that was your checkbook, you would be broke and have filed for bankruptcy.
However, the government just keeps spending more than it takes in from tax revenue – and we allow it to do so. And it’s not just the debt that has to be repaid (theoretically).
You and I are being asked, via our taxes, to pay the interest on that debt and we don’t get any tangible benefits from that money (no new bridges or roads, no new jobs, etc.).
With regards to turning over our healthcare system to government control, aside from the cost, based on what we know about our government’s ability to effectively and efficiently run something, anything, should we do that? Enough said.

What about the sincerity of the politicians pushing those programs at the same time they’re telling us they don’t want to spend $5 billion forborder security because doing so would add to our debt?
Remember, the wall is $5 billion

with measurable benefits and health care for all and the GND is $125 trillion of new debt with smoke and mirrors benefits. Does that appear to be hypocritical to you?
We learn from our experiences and, over time, we have a built-in data bank that allows us to compare the body of knowledge we have acquired over time and based upon our experiences with new things as they arise.
This would be a good time to invest a little of our time and compare the likely results of the GND with what we know about how things actually work.
After reading the GND several times, I couldn’t decide whether to laugh or cry. The idea that we can totally replace the energy we get today from fossil fuels with “renewables” without the use of nuclear energy within 10-20 years is ludicrous.

According to a Jan. 11, 2019, article in the Wall Street Journal, it would take about 100 trillion kilowatt hours (kwh) per year to offset the carbon from today’s use of fossil fuels. To get to that level of carbon-free energy would take 3.3 trillion kwh of new, clean energy every year for 30 years. Without the inclusion of nuclear energy in that mix, we simply can’t ramp up quickly enough.
Germany, the country with the most ambitious effort so far, only added about one-fifth of the amount needed. According to the article, if every nation was as ambitious as Germany, it would take about 150, not 10 or 20 as proposed in the GND, years to decarbonize – and the GND doesn’t include nuclear power as an option.
To paraphrase the article, if we look at the two renewables with the most promise, solar and wind, they’re faced with this reality: When the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow they don’t produce much reliable energy. The GND relies heavily on “clean” electricity, but offers no reliable way of producing it when and where it is needed.

Over the next few articles, I’ll delve into the specifics of the GND to examine where opportunities lie and where the intellectual integrity of the proposals is questionable.
The glowing platitudes sound good when you say them fast, but what do they really mean to your wallet, freedom and ability to keep your pipes from freezing on a bitterly cold night?
Of one thing I am certain – if airplane travel is severely curtailed by the GND that finally emerges, the congressmen and senators from Hawaii won’t support it. That’s a long way to row.

Mike Zagata, former DEC commissioner in the Pataki Administration and environmental executive with Fortune 500 companies, lives in West Davenport.

Posted

Tags

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Related Articles

ZAGATA: Lessons On Oil Embargo Forgotten

THE VIEW FROM WEST DAVENPORT Oil Embargo’s Lesson Forgotten In 1973, the Organization for the Oil Exporting Countries (OPEC) from the Middle East imposed an oil embargo on the United States. It had a crippling impact on our economy and on our way of life because we didn’t produce enough energy in this country to meet the demand. People waited in line for hours to buy a few gallons of gasoline and tempers flared. The same impact was felt on heating oil and the petroleum feed stocks used to manufacture nearly everything we used to maintain our lifestyle. It was…
April 8, 2020

DUNCAN: To Preserve Our Earth, Live By Nature’s Rules

LETTER from SCOTT DUNCAN To Preserve Our Earth, Live By Nature’s Rules To the Editor: So the fracking industry comes into town and uses a lot of clean water that then becomes unusable, tears up and down the roads with trucks, and drills for the gas. Then pipes it out of the county and sells it to? … and this will benefit the poor people, how? Poor people don’t always own the land. Mike Zagata’s description of fracking left out a number of critical elements. One of which is the use of water. Living around here it may be hard…
January 3, 2020

ZAGATA: Save Eagles From Environmentalism

VIEW FROM WEST DAVENPORT Save Eagles From Environmentalism In 1969, our country moved from demonstrating against the Vietnam War to marching for environmental protection. That year, Congress passed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which required federal agencies to do an Environmental Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prior to granting a permit allowing a “project” to go forward. If it was determined the project wouldn’t cause any “significant” environmental impact, a Negative Declaration (Neg Dec) could be issued. If it was determined, via a science-based review, that there would be significant impact, the applicant was required to…
January 2, 2020

PUTTING THE COMMUNITY BACK INTO THE NEWSPAPER

For a limited time, new annual subscriptions to the hard copy of “The Freeman’s Journal” or “Hometown Oneonta” (which also includes unlimited access to AllOtsego.com), or digital-only access to AllOtsego.com, can also give back to one of their favorite Otsego County charitable organizations.

$5.00 of your subscription will be donated to the nonprofit of your choice: Friends of the Feral-TNR, Super Heroes Humane Society, or Susquehanna Society of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 

Visit our “subscribe” page and select your charity of choice at checkout