Thursday, December 29, 2022
Oh, So That's How USPS Plans to Go Green By 2026
Monkey see, monkey do—that’s what the United States Postal Service is going regarding its delivery fleet. They’re going to blow some $11 billion on electric vehicles after a push from the Biden administration. It won’t be immediate, but the goal is to have 66,000 cars delivering mail by 2026. Also, in that same timeframe, USPS hopes all purchases of future vehicles will carry zero emissions (via WaPo):
The U.S. Postal Service will buy 66,000 vehicles to build one of the largest electric fleets in the nation, Biden administration officials announced Tuesday, turning to one of the most recognizable vehicles on American roads — boxy white mail trucks — to fight climate change.
Postal officials’ plans call for buying 60,000 “Next Generation Delivery Vehicles” from defense contractor Oshkosh, of which 45,000 will be electric, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy told The Washington Post. The agency will also purchase 46,000 models from mainstream automakers, of which 21,000 will be electric.
The Postal Service will spend $9.6 billion on the vehicles and associated infrastructure, officials said, including $3 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act, President Biden and congressional Democrats’ landmark climate, health-care and tax law.
By 2026, the agency expects to purchase zero-emissions delivery trucks almost exclusively, DeJoy said. It’s a major achievement for a White House climate agenda that leans heavily on reducing greenhouse gases from vehicles.
“It’s wonderful that the Postal Service will be at the forefront of the switch to clean electric vehicles, with postal workers as their ambassadors,” said John Podesta, White House senior adviser for clean energy innovation. “It will get people thinking, ‘If the postal worker delivering our Christmas presents … is driving an EV, I can drive one, too.’”
No one looks to their local postal worker to gauge what's hot regarding car sales. No one is going to say, 'look, the postal guy or gal is driving an EV'; I need one too,' that's ridiculous.
The USPS should post profits before blowing billions on a fleet that will probably cause more problems than it solves. Second, it’s not green since it uses fossil fuel to charge its batteries. Do liberals think an energy wizard resides within the power stations for these cars? There are logistical issues as well, especially post offices in rural areas. Reports of electric vehicles are conking out as the power station infrastructure remains underdeveloped. That’s all an aside; the USPS should have to post consecutive years of profit before this Democrat-led boondoggle project gets the green light. Blowing $11 billion on electric cars isn’t going to help bring this struggling agency to solvency.
******************************************************
ESG’s Perverse, Narrowly Focused Ethics
As most people know, ESG stands for Environmental protection, Social justice, and Governance of corporate and societal affairs. They’re all noble-sounding causes. However, under ESG they’re centered around progressive, woke agendas, with the prevention of “manmade climate cataclysms” uppermost. Fund assets are used to drive “net zero” climate agendas and punish or de-fund fossil fuel companies.
That narrow focus creates serious problems. Those trillions of dollars are supposed to be passively invested in the index and other funds, under fiduciary obligations to secure maximum returns in support of the state, local, corporate and personal retirement and investment accounts. Under ESG, however, strong returns are too often sacrificed to serve politicized agendas, often in collusion with governments, activists, and other financial institutions, and thus also in violation of antitrust laws and basic ethical principles.
That’s why Asset manager Vanguard recently left the UN-sponsored “Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero.” Meanwhile, Arizona, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Texas, West Virginia, and other states are pulling tens of billions of dollars out of BlackRock, State Street, and other Wall Street asset management firms, for violating fiduciary duties.
A second ESG ethical dilemma arises from the way practitioners employ narrow definitions of ES&G to virtue-signal, pontificate, and impose prescriptive agendas. When the “existential threat of manmade climate change” is the primary arbiter, enormous problems associated with replacing fossil fuels with “clean renewable energy” are simply ignored, suppressed, and censored from the analysis.
Here are some of the people and planet realities that must be included in any ESG analysis.
Environmental protection. Rather than looking only at the temperatures, storms, droughts, rising seas and other environmental costs that climate models falsely blame on fossil fuel emissions – any accurate and honest ESG scorecard must also assess the ecological impacts from the wind-solar-battery (WSB) energy systems that will supposedly replace oil, gas, and coal.
WSB systems and associated transmission lines do not appear spontaneously, via Materials Acquisition for Global Industrial Change (MAGIC). They require mining on unprecedented scales. President Biden’s initial batch of offshore wind turbines alone would require 110,000 tons of copper, refined from 25,000,000 tons of ore, after removing 40,000,000 tons of overburden – plus millions of tons of iron, manganese, aluminum, nickel, concrete, plastics, and other materials ... from billions of tons of ores.
Replacing all U.S. coal and gas electricity generation with WSB – plus gasoline vehicles and gas stoves and furnaces – would require tens of thousands of wind turbines, billions of solar panels, billions of battery modules for vehicles and backup electricity storage, and thousands of miles of new transmission lines. Has BlackRock calculated the ore body and mining requirements for that? For a global transition?
All those turbines, panels, modules, transmission lines, mines, processing plants, and factories have to be located somewhere. Have the ESG potentates determined in whose backyards they will go? (Probably not Larry Fink’s or John Kerry’s.) Have they assessed the impacts on scenery, habitats, and wildlife? the air and water pollution from the mines and other operations? Did those operations get ESG scores?
Social justice. ESG theology holds that the poor and people of color suffer most from climate change. In reality, they benefit most from having abundant, reliable, affordable fuels and electricity – for cars, jobs, modern homes, cooking, heat, and air conditioning. The poor and people of color are not faring all that well in Britain and Europe, where the “transition to green energy” is well underway.
Over seven million British households have fallen into “fuel poverty” this winter, and special “warm rooms” have been set up to help people survive freezing weather. Recent headlines warn that Britain could have nationwide blackouts and extensive factory shutdowns and layoffs this winter. In Germany, families are stocking up on candles, so that they can at least read while they shiver in their homes.
Developing countries desperately need dependable, affordable electricity to create jobs, lift families out of poverty, modernize homes, schools, and hospitals, provide clean water, and replace wood and animal dung for cooking and heating. Even today, millions of parents and children die from respiratory and intestinal diseases that are unheard of in wealthy countries.
ESG scoring ignores all of this, actively stymies investment in fossil fuel power plants in Africa and other countries, and attempts to limit financing to wind and solar energy and whatever jobs and living standards this limited, weather-dependent energy can support. That’s hardly ethical or socially responsible.
Governance of corporate and societal affairs. ESG activists and financial institutions coopt and collude with corporate, federal, state, and local governments to serve the climate crisis agenda, and drive investment out of fossil fuel endeavors and into “renewable” energy. In essence, this is fascism, an economic system in which government doesn’t own the means of production but controls them through laws, policies, and arrangements with financial institutions, corporations, activists, media, and academia.
Equally troublesome, ESG inevitably results in modern industrialized nations de-developing, as their factories and jobs migrate to China, India, and other countries that are not obligated under climate agreements to reduce their coal and natural gas use anytime soon, have no intention of doing so and are burning record amounts of coal to ensure reliable and affordable electricity.
This also raises disturbing national security concerns, as the United States and its allies become ever more dependent on China and Chinese-controlled supply chains for wind, solar, battery, transformer, communication, computing, healthcare, and even defense/weaponry raw materials and technologies.
ESG advocates minimize these concerns, even as they ignore how soaring raw material demands under Net Zero plans would trigger skyrocketing prices for increasingly scarce commodities, and thus imperil the economies of nations across the globe.
The words scam and fraud come to mind. But an even better term is Shanghaied: using trickery, intimidation, or violence to force someone to serve your navy ... or company. In this case, ESG pressures are forcing investors, companies, and countries to serve the interest of China’s government and corporate sectors, which control supply chains and manufacturing for technologies of every description, especially in the energy sector.
This Christmas or Hanukkah, let’s all give the gift of wise, honest, accurate, and insightful Environmental, Social, and Governance principles to our friends, relatives, and financial institutions.
*****************************************************
It is Fossil Fuels that Keep Us Warm and Secure During Winter Months
As a historic bomb cyclone ravages much of the country, this extreme weather event has killed at least 20 people and put travel at a standstill.
And it doesn’t help those in distress –or without power – feel secure when many in the media fear-monger about climate change correlating with winter weather.
More reassuringly, however, conditions aren’t worse. Why? Continued reliance on fossil fuels keeps us warm and provides energy security.
Much to the Biden administration’s dismay, net zero policies will make extreme winter events difficult to weather.
The North American Reliability Corporation (NERC) issued its 2022-2023 Winter Reliability Assessment, warning, “The capacity of the natural gas transportation infrastructure could be constrained when cold temperatures cause peak demand for both electricity generation and consumer space-heating needs. Potential constraints on the fuel delivery systems and limited inventory of liquid fuels may exacerbate the risks for fuel-based generator outages and output reductions that result in energy emergencies during extreme weather.”
Per the U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA)’s, the daily electricity generation mix map shows consumers are using natural gas (39%), coal (24%), and nuclear (16%). Where do solar and wind fall? At a paltry two percent and seven percent, respectively.
In 2020, fossil fuels accounted for 80% of U.S. energy consumption and 80% of energy production.
In 2018, the Department of Energy (DOE) explained continued reliance on oil, coal, and gas keeps Americans thriving and warm during winter months: “This increased demand requires a steady and reliable energy supply, and fossil fuels play an important role in meeting that demand…This need for more heating and electricity can put a strain on the electric grid—especially during extreme weather events. But, fossil fuels provide a stable source of power generation to keep the grid up and running.”
With Winter Storm Elliott plaguing at least 60% of the U.S., our electric grid is vulnerable if we move away from fossil fuels.
The White House desires an “economy-wide” transition to faulty renewables like solar and wind by 2050.
As of this writing, 13 states comprising the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast–including Virginia–are currently at risk of rolling blackouts this past holiday week. Ironically, many of the states affected belong to the flawed carbon market and 11-member Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) that has encouraged going net-zero.
But don’t be surprised to see Biden and company double down on net-zero.
Coupled with this is a push to phase out gas-powered cars by arbitrary deadlines to push Americans to an entirely electric vehicle fleet.
Imagine driving in atrocious winter weather in an electric vehicle–unreliable vehicles forced on consumers and mandated by the government (federal or state).
During a January 2022 winter storm that paralyzed drivers on I-95 in Virginia, Washington Post columnist Charles Lane reminded readers that an entirely EV fleet would have made that situation more dire.
Lane observed, “If everyone had been driving electric vehicles, this mess could well have been worse.”
“All else being equal, though, cars and trucks with internal combustion engines (ICE) would have the advantage in coping with a sudden challenge such as the I-95 fiasco. It is much easier to rehabilitate a disabled ICE vehicle. Rescuers can deliver gallons of gas in convenient jugs; gas stations are still far more numerous than EV charging stations; and ICE car batteries can be jump-started in minutes. Absent some breakthrough in mobile charging technology, out-of-juice EVs in out-of-the-way places will need a tow. If Monday’s nightmare had been an all-electric affair, they might have littered the highway for miles,” he added.
He’s correct.
Naturally, climate alarmists are blaming arctic warming for these cold blasts.
A Washington Post headline reads, “Scientists say Arctic warming could be to blame for blasts of extreme cold.” The tagline added, “Research suggests that climate change is altering the jet stream, pushing frigid air down to southern climes more frequently. But the scientific jury is still out.”
Ryan Maue, meteorologist and former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) chief scientist under the Trump administration, tweeted, “Climate change doesn't make nasty winter storms or cold more frequent.”
Michael Shellenberger, environmentalist and author of Apocalypse Never, observed in his Substack newsletter, “In other words, the underlying reason for the electricity emergency is the lack of natural gas, nuclear, and coal, which can provide reliable electricity in all weather conditions, unlike solar panels and wind turbines. It’s true that solar panels and wind turbines can still operate in cold weather. There is often still sunlight and wind when it is cold. Snow can be brushed off of solar panels, and it is possible to de-ice frozen wind turbines. But the sun often doesn’t shine during the hours people most need electricity and wind is not reliable enough to provide electricity during the winter.”
What’s the lesson here? Let's not bite the hand that feeds us.
There’s no practical reason to trade reliable, cheap, fossil fuels and nuclear energy for more costly and unreliable energy sources.
********************************************************
Iced out! Furious Tesla owners share videos of their cars failing to work in harsh winter snowstorm as arctic temperatures freeze doors shut
Furious Tesla owners have complained about being locked out of their car after their door handles froze shut during a massive winter storm in Canada and the US.
Rachel Modestino, a meteorologist from Ontario, was unable to get into her sleek black Tesla when her door latch wouldn't budge on December 23 when temperatures hit a low of five degrees Fahrenheit.
Modestino posted a now-viral video with more than 10.1 million views of her struggle as the car was partially covered in ice.
'Bet ya didn’t think of ice in the Tesla design,' Modestino wrote in the Tweet.
Modestino was quickly met with Tesla critics coming to her aid to complain about her problem while others offered her advice on how to open her car, including using an app on her phone that will unlatch the door for her.
'You shouldn't need to use Twitter to learn how to use your expensive car,' one person wrote.
'You shouldn't need a car cover to get into your expensive car. Every other car company has had this figured out for decades but people just keep making excuses for Tesla because they're in the cult of Elon. '
The meteorologist responded to the contentious anti-Elon Musk and Tesla thread to clarify she was simply showing off her dilemma rather than critiquing Musk.
'OKAY, this went off... Not meant to dig Elon (I love my car),' Modestino wrote. 'Only tweeted because I thought it was a silly flaw for the price.
'I learnt: unlatch capability, defrost longer, be less gentle with your 2nd baby & car covers. Ty for the help, be kind, Merry Christmas.'
Meanwhile, other people took an aim at criticizing Modestino for paying nearly $50,000 for a car but not having a garage to put it in.
'If you have a tesla you should have enough money to have it in a garage,' one person wrote.
To which Modestino responded: 'Okay but I don’t.'
Meanwhile, Modestino wasn't the only Tesla owner struggling with her vehicle during the Christmas holiday.
Domenick Nati, 44, Tesla owner in Virginia, was forced to cancel his Christmas plans with his son after his electric vehicle failed to charge during the winter storm.
Nati told Business Insider how he plugged his Tesla S into a supercharger in Lynchburg on Friday as temperatures hovered below 20 degrees Fahrenheit.
But as the hours went by, the percentage charge dipped as the temperature got lower, before the car stopped charging altogether.
He then tried again on Christmas Eve, but after a few hours of nothing happening, he decided to abandon his car at the lot and get a ride home.
Nati tried to charge his Tesla S at home, but had no luck there either.
So he went back out on Christmas Eve, and posted a video to TikTok of his efforts to get the car to charge.
Nati said he tried to contact Tesla for help, but did not receive an answer.
*************************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment