“So on the eve of another round of high risk construction projects, we have a system of scattered companies with weak politicized managements trying to implement expensive new technology with other people’s money. This is truly a recipe for disaster.”
“The technical and environmental case for nuclear power seems compelling. The case for allowing regulated politically-oriented utilities to be managers of the projects is not compelling. The only thing the utilities have learned since the last round of nuclear plant construction is how to protect their stockholders through politics rather than with management competence.”
“The Commission should require 100% of all new power plants be built by Independent Power Producers. Affiliates of the utility should not be allowed to bid on new generation for the territory of any sister company.”
Nuclear financial risk is the most important aspect of the new generation decisions which face the Georgia Public Service Commission.…
Continue Reading“The Clinton plan states that: ‘the United States has 17 national labs that work on energy, but not one that is focused exclusively on water’.”
“In California, they say: ‘water runs uphill toward money.’ To that, now should be added the adage: ‘Water runs up-Hillary to money’.”
News flash: Hillary’s Western Water Plan would trickle up to elites.
On Sept. 18 the San Francisco Chronicle poured water on Donald Trump for having no water infrastructure plan at all other than his scoffing that “there was no California drought” (see “Clinton Plans While Trump Scoffs on Water, Environment”). Trump was right, but that is besides the point here.
Left out of the Chronicle article was that the benefits of Hillary Clinton’s “Western Water Partnership”plan, as part of her proposed $275 billion infrastructure funding and make-work jobs program, would flow mainly to high-level, planners, union labor, well-connected engineering firms and politicians.…
Continue Reading“Ethical people in wealthy developed countries should support the aspirations of poor families, communities and countries all over the world. They should help them address Real World health and environmental problems, while resisting calls to focus on speculative problems or implement policies that will actually worsen current conditions, disease problems and death tolls.”
[This completes the series of Part I and Part II.]
The political and intellectual elites emphasize climate change over the basics of life. These concerns were dramatically illustrated in Chad, Central Africa, where in 2009 the government banned the manufacture, importation, and use of charcoal – the sole source of fuel for 99 percent of Chadians. “Cooking is a fundamental necessity for every household,” its Environment Minister pronounced. But “with climate change every citizen must protect his environment.”…
Continue Reading