Everyone
wants to breathe fresh air and seeks to reduce air pollution. And,
according to government statistics, we have made great progress over the
past 50 years in doing so. The air is cleaner over America’s cities
and towns than ever before and the engineers who helped achieve this
through the design and construction of automobiles with low pollution
exhausts are to be greatly commended.
Automobiles emit NO3 (nitrous
trioxide) during acceleration, which is a pollutant. This happens
primarily when inadequate highways cause stop and go traffic. More and
better highways will reduce automobile pollution even further. Frankly
the construction of bigger, better highways that have both limited
access and that provide unrestricted use will lower pollution from this
source even further.
CO2 (carbon
dioxide), also emitted by autos, is not a pollutant. Although it was
designated as such by the Environmental Protection Agency, there is no
scientific basis for such a classification. You and I exhale CO2, as do animals. Trees and plants depend on CO2 to survive and grow. It seems apparent that CO2 was classified as a pollutant simply a means to gain more power for the politicians over your life and mine.
As
a sidebar, Climategate has exposed the so-called “hocky stick” graph as
a fraud. The graph purported to show an above average increase in
planet temperatures coincident with the advent of the industrial age.
We now know that the numbers were fudged to intentionally create this
misleading graph. In fact, there are no objective scientific studies
showing any significant increase in planet temperatures with the onset
of the industrial age. Accordingly we can now place belief in “global
warming” into the same category as those who believed that the earth was
flat. For more information on this go to www.petitionproject.org,
to read a petition signed by more than 30,000 American engineers and
scientists. I’ll take the word of real scientists and engineers over
political scientists any day.
Why
then, I wonder, are we taking a big step backward in the battle against
air pollution? After the automobile, the largest source of pollution
(according to the decidedly left wing Union of Concerned Scientists) is
America’s coal fired electric plants. The UOCS states on their website
that coal fired power plants generate 54% of America’s electricity and
are our number one polluter. Setting aside the fact that the UOCS may
intentionally overstate numbers due to their political bias, let’s
assume for the moment that their numbers are accurate. If so, it would
seem to me that our goal should be to limit the use of electrical power
for transportation purposes. Duh!
So
why then do our liberal friends support the use of mass transit and
electric cars that derive all their power from electricity? We already
know that 54% of all our electricity comes from coal fire plants, so
won’t the use of more electricity to power mass transportation and to
power electric automobiles simply increase pollution?
Contrary
to the propaganda, electric cars will generate far, far more pollution
than any other existing automobile on the road. It’s a fact. How can
anyone deny it? The electricity they use will come primarily from coal
fired plants.
Similarly,
electric motors that drive mass transportation will also put tons of
pollutants into the air since they too derive their power primarily from
coal fired electric plants.
While
electric cars and mass transportation are hailed as pollution free,
it’s simply untrue. They will, in fact, receive their power from the
highest polluting source in the nation, America’s coal fired plants.
Liberals
may suggest that getting our electricity from coal fired power plants
will soon come to an end by moving to renewable power sources. But
generating all our power from wind, waves, and the sun is, from a
realistic engineering perspective, simply pie in the sky. We can, at
most, generate 20% of our electricity from these sources. And even that
will not happen overnight. Germany has already abandoned its goal of
generating 35% of its electrical needs from renewable sources. It’s a
mirage, not a real solution.
While
we may achieve a breakthrough in reducing pollution from coal fired
electrical generation, we can’t count on it. But we will continue to
depend on it for the near future. Politicians and political scientists
seem to think that they can legislate scientific advances. They can’t.
When they interfere with the market place they only make matters worse.
Their
next gimmick is a carbon tax. It sounds clever, fair, and even
scientific, but it’s a scam. A carbon tax will dramatically drive up
the cost of electricity and gasoline for every American. So much for
the President’s promise not to tax anyone who makes less than $250,000 a
year. A carbon tax will be a crushing blow to every American family
and to our economy in general. It will result in European style
gasoline taxes of $7 to $10 per gallon. It will be an especially
devastating tax on anyone who commutes to work and it will be a
financial back-breaker for young married couples who are just getting by
under an already oppressive tax system.
Just
as Obamacare will mean the rationing of health care services for all
Americans along with less quality, less innovation, and less freedom, a
carbon tax will result in higher taxes, smaller and more dangerous cars,
and less freedom.
Electric cars are not a solution, they will only make air pollution worse.
Neither is mass transportation a solution, it too will exacerbate air pollution.
Gasoline
taxes (both state and federal) up until the 1970s were dedicated
exclusively to highway repair and construction. The highway trust funds
provided adequate funds to make sure bridges did not collapse, that
highways were maintained, and that the necessary funding was available
for highway construction. When politicians’ greed for more tax dollars
overcame their common sense, the highway trust funds were busted and now
the gasoline taxes you and I pay are used for general funds.
There are three things we can do to improve transportation and increase individual freedom:
1. Re-establish the federal and state gasoline trust funds to solve congestion and thus reduce pollution.
2. Drill
for domestic oil in known oil reserves in Alaska, South Dakota, and
numerous other states to create energy independence, reduce the price of
gasoline, and thereby benefit hard working American families.
3. Construct nuclear power plants to further reduce pollution and make America energy independent.
Nuclear
power would also justify and encourage the building of non-government
subsidized electric cars that truly would not be polluters. And a halt
in construction of taxpayer subsidized mass transportation would be a
shot in the arm for an economy impaired and inhibited by government
intervention.
So the next time
someone hails electric cars and mass transportation as pollution free,
gently and persuasively tell them the truth. Point them to real science
and to market place solutions that mean more freedom and more
prosperity for every American.
No comments:
Post a Comment