Solving Africa’s Energy Poverty, Part 2

Why Wind Power is a poor choice for developing countries
Wind turbines share pastures with native herdsmen

In an energy starved developing country an all-of-the-above approach is best, combining fossil fuel, hydroelectric, geothermal, and nuclear, where available, and possibly supplemented by wind and solar “renewable” and “sustainable” methods which are recommended and allowed by environmentalists, but which are the worst possible alternatives.

Wind power relies on huge wind turbines on towers to generate electricity in a narrow range of wind speeds.  The amount of power generated is both unpredictable and intermittent because wind is not constant and wind speed unpredictably varies widely from none to gale-force levels that would damage the system if not switched off. Another power source must be available to supply backup power. Fossil fuel power plants require hours to start up due to the time required to heat water to steam. Such a process is both time consuming and expensive. Therefore, they must be kept at the ready constantly to provide backup power more quickly. Wind power, at best, can be only a supplemental source. Here are a few other negative facts:

  • Wind turbines require expensive regular maintenance and replacement, and their efficiency declines with age. Estimated to last twenty to twenty-five years, more typically they require frequent repair over ten to fifteen years of life.
  • Most wind turbines require large rare earth magnets (neodymium and dysprosium) obtained from Mongolia by a mining and refining process that results in mountains of toxic and radioactive solid wastes and contaminated lakes. The rare earth elements are called that because they are not found in rich veins like other ores, but are diffusely dispersed, so they produce huge amounts of wastes, including radioactive elements such as uranium and thorium, when refined. Since neodymium/dysprosium magnets are ten times stronger than conventional magnets, they are needed to convert the slow rotation of the rotor into useful electricity; otherwise complex gears would be needed to achieve the 1500 RPM generation speeds necessary with conventional magnets. Rare earth metals are used in small amounts in catalytic converters, display screens, audio speakers and miniaturized electronics, but the amounts are tiny compared to the hundreds or thousands of pounds needed for a single turbine.
  • Wind turbines kill large numbers of birds and bats, including endangered raptors. Birds and bats are needed to reduce populations of insects such as mosquitoes. Insect eating species of bats can eat one thousand insects an hour, or five to six thousand each night. While the environmental activists claim to be protecting wildlife, they don’t seem to be concerned about wind turbines killing bats and birds, especially large predators.
  • Wind turbines produce low frequency sound, including infrasound that our ears cannot detect. However, infrasound can cause unsettling and harmful physical symptoms such as “nausea and confusion, blurred vision, vertigo, headaches, tachycardia, heightened blood pressure, pain and ringing in the ears, difficulties with memory and concentration, anxiety, depression, irritability, and panic attacks.”[1] If the sound of wind turbines does that to us, what is it doing to animals, especially those that use infrasound like elephants and whales? More research is needed.

[1] Parker, Helen Schwiesow, PhD, LCP, “Science Deniers in the wind industry,” Watt’s Up With That, https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/08/science-deniers-in-the-wind-industry/. Parker is a Licensed Clinical Psychologist and a Past Clinical Supervisory Faculty member at the University of Virginia Medical School. Her career includes practical experience in the fields of autism, sensory perception, memory and learning, attention deficit and anxiety disorders, including panic disorder and PTSD.

**********************************************************************

If you like this post share it with your friends, and sign up to follow this blog by email. Thank you.

The book: Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries will be published on October 23, 2018. Print and e-book will be available online and in bookstores.

My first book, Perverted Truth Exposed: How Progressive Philosophy has Corrupted Science was published in 2016. It is available in print and e-book, on line only, through World Net Daily store, Amazon, Books-A-Million and Barnes & Noble.  See the companion blog at www.realscienceblog.com  for related posts and pages.

 

 

 

Solving Africa’s Energy Poverty Problem, Part 1

Gathering wood for cooking in Africa

Based on an assumed need to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2), climate change advocates and international agreements generally provide investment funding and technical support only for so-called sustainable renewable energy, such as solar and wind power, both of which are unreliable, intermittent, and unsustainable, while they discourage or prohibit development of power plants based on abundant fossil fuel (coal, oil, and natural gas), hydroelectric, geothermal, or nuclear energy. It is well documented that environmentalists have stopped or prevented the construction of more than two hundred hydroelectric dams in Africa[1], although it is the cleanest, most reliable and safest energy source available, and uses conventional materials and proven technologies. Hydroelectric power is also “sustainable” over time and returns the water used to the environment. Power in the form of electricity, natural gas, and petroleum products are essential for economic development, industry, transportation and medical infrastructure as well as home cooking, heating and refrigeration, which are needed to provide a safe, clean food supply and to reduce deadly indoor air pollution from bio-fueled cooking and heating fires.

Without adequate power, the continent’s health and economy cannot improve as it should. The answer to Africa’s energy poverty is an all-of-the-above solution. Environmentalists from developed countries and international governmental and non-governmental organizations have no business denying African nations the chance to better their citizens through the same means that developed countries used in the past to raise themselves out of energy poverty for their own development. (They have an “I got mine, to hell with you” attitude.) Coal, oil, and natural gas electricity generation must be allowed to continue and grow for the foreseeable future until other means such as hydroelectric, geothermal and nuclear facilities can be built.

Africa can’t afford the luxury of skipping these vital steps toward ending energy poverty in order to adopt unreliable solar and wind alone. It would be like giving a dying man an aspirin and expecting him to survive.

Today’s coal fired power plants with modern air cleaning technology are not the dirty, polluting monsters they once were, even though they are still portrayed that way. In developed countries, technology to remove particulates, heavy metals, and sulfates have long been utilized. Emissions consist mostly of carbon dioxide and water vapor. Modern power plants use coal, oil, or natural gas to heat water for steam to turn turbines attached to electrical generators. This steam and hot water are not released directly into streams but are cooled to condense the steam and reduce the water temperature to a level compatible with life in the streams. Some of the hot water is recycled to efficiently produce more steam for power generation. The huge towers seen at power plants are not emitting pollution as environmentalist propaganda suggests. They are cooling towers that are used to cool the water and steam before returning it to its source so that only water vapor is emitted. Similar air cleaning and cooling facilities can be added to any existing power plant in developing countries.

____________________

[1] For example, twenty years ago, Brent Blackwelder, president of  Friends of the Earth bragged that FoE and other environmental groups have succeeded in blocking almost 300 dam projects in the Third World on a TV documentary series, ‘Against Nature,’  hosted by Martin Durkin, London Channel 4 Television Corporation, 1997

*******************************************************************

If you like this post share it with your friends, and sign up to follow this blog by email. Thank you.

The book: Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries will be published on October 23, 2018. Print and e-book will be available online and in bookstores.

My first book, Perverted Truth Exposed: How Progressive Philosophy has Corrupted Science was published in 2016. It is available in print and e-book, on line only, through World Net Daily store, Amazon, Books-A-Million and Barnes & Noble.  See the companion blog at www.realscienceblog.com  for related posts and pages.

How The War On Climate Change Slams The World’s Poor — NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood The latest contribution from Bjorn Lomborg: When a “solution” to a problem causes more damage than the problem, policymaking has gone awry. That’s where we often find ourselves with global warming today. Activist organizations like Worldwatch argue that higher temperatures will make more people hungry, so drastic carbon cuts are […]

via How The War On Climate Change Slams The World’s Poor — NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

The Overpopulation Myth as Excuse to Control the Poor

Communism, Environmentalism and the Overpopulation Myth

In 1798 the English economist and statistician Thomas Robert Malthus,[1] whose father was a friend and admirer of Hume and Rousseau, published An Essay on the Principles of Population[2] in which he predicted future starvation based on the assumption that the rate of population growth would far surpass the growth rate of food supplies. Using this, he proposed draconian measures to “fix” an assumed overpopulation problem at a time when world population was below one billion. Even to this day, with 7 billion people, the world is not overpopulated except in certain crowded city neighborhoods, but population control advocates still push the myth.

Malthus made two major erroneous assumptions:

  1. Genetic inferiority and enhanced fertility of less accomplished peoples
  2. No improvement in crop yields per acre.

Malthus recognized two types of solutions to the “problem”: positive and preventative. The positive restraints were things like wars, disasters, starvation, and epidemic diseases that keep populations and lifespans low. In this sense, such tragedies were seen as a good thing. The preventative restraints were government and voluntary control over marriages, self-restraint, and reduction of public charity. Aid to the poor was seen as a bad thing, perpetuating the supposed population problem.

Using his erroneous assumptions of an overpopulated world on the brink of starvation as a reason, Malthus advocated government measures to reduce population growth rates among the poor such as regulating marriage and educating for moral abstinence. However, he opposed nutritional relief and improved hospital access among the poor that would have reduced infant mortality and extended life spans. In his opinion, helping the poor only made the supposed overpopulation problem worse and prevented the development of the ideal utopian dream of the materialists of the day, such as William Godwin, Rousseau, and his father Daniel Malthus, who envisioned a utopian future of anarchic communism, absolute equality, and elimination of poverty. However, raising the standard of living of the poor by education, employment opportunities, and improved healthcare would have been a better way of accomplishing his stated goals of stabilizing both the population and food supplies.

“Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country, we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations. But above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases; and restrain those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpations of particular disorders.”

—Thomas Malthus

Malthus also never considered the fact that a larger population would allow for a greater division of labor and result in increased efficiency and prosperity. People were seen only as consumers, not as contributors to the economy. He never envisioned that these “lower classes” would be capable of improving their lives with proper care and education. Instead, he viewed them as genetically inferior and incapable of improvement or accomplishment. In his opinion, lower classes were in a permanent social class by birth and genetics. He extended this same philosophy to Africa where he observed, as a positive, that the tsetse fly and malaria helped to keep human population numbers low and life spans short, thus preserving wildlife and its habitat. Here are the first seeds of environmentalism and its link to the overpopulation myth.

“We are bound in justice and honor formally to disclaim the right of the poor to support.”

—Thomas Malthus

He assumed that the only way to grow more food was to increase the number of acres under cultivation, which limited the total “carrying capacity” of any region and indeed the world. Thanks to the Green Revolution of modern agriculture, beginning in the 1950s and 1960s, and later technological developments, we now know that yields have improved by orders of magnitude through things like introduction of more prolific, disease resistant plant varieties and high yield hybrids, nitrogen and mineral fertilization, mechanization, and control of weeds and crop destroying pests like insects and rodents.

Nor did Malthus foresee the natural reduction of family size that usually occurs when people are raised beyond near-starvation subsistence and when diseases are controlled, thereby reducing high childhood mortality rates. Gradual shift from purely agrarian to free-market trade and industrialization also reduces populations because larger families are not needed for subsistence farming.

            Karl Marx, a contemporary of Darwin, read Malthus’ book but disagreed with his premise of limiting the poor to further society. Instead Marx argued that the exploitation of the poor by the rich, that is, oppression of the proletariat by the bourgeois, was the cause of poverty. However, rather than help raise their standard of living through economic means within the system, Marx sought to use the poor to overthrow established authority, which had in reality supplied both charity and employment to raise the standard of living of the people.

            The utopian dream and the exploitation themes were the early seeds of socialism and Communism. Both the Malthusian and Marxist views were detrimental to the poor; on the one hand denial of aid to the poor to raise their standard of living, and on the other hand use of the poor in attempts to overthrow authority that might have supplied such aid. Note that Malthus and his communistic associates lived over seventy years before Marx put the Communist philosophy on paper in the Communist Manifesto (1848).

It is also true that the racial superiority attitudes of the seventeenth century and earlier ages have been a persistent, though often not fully recognized, thread throughout the history of Western civilization of kings, serfs, slaves, and colonization of other lands. This same perverted philosophy persists today among progressives who only typically want to manage the poor while keeping them poor and “in their place,” that is, controlled.

Malthus was pushing evolution and eugenics long before Charles Darwin and Frances Galton, the supposed originators of these theories. Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace, founders of the theory of evolution, both had copies of Malthus’ book, which talks about changing conditions causing physical changes, the genetic inferiority of the poor and less developed cultures and races, and the need to control them. Darwin, in his own book, On the Origin of Species (1859), explains evolution as, “this is the doctrine of Malthus applied to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms.” Like Malthusian philosophy, the mechanism of evolution, survival of the fittest through natural selection, depends on competition for scarce resources as the basis of survival.

[1] The popular press calls him a minister, but he was no more a minister than Charles Darwin was, although both had studied theology for their wealthy families and had been assigned an Anglican ministry.

[2] Thomas Robert Malthus, An Essay on the Principles of Population (London, 1798).

***************************************************************************

If you like this post share it with your friends, and sign up to follow this blog by email. Thank you.

The book: Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries will be published in October, 2018. Print and e-book will be available online and in bookstores.

My first book, Perverted Truth Exposed: How Progressive Philosophy has Corrupted Science was published in 2016. It is available in print and e-book, on line only, through World Net Daily store, Amazon, Books-A-Million and Barnes & Noble.  See the companion blog at www.realscienceblog.com  for related posts and pages.

Overpopulation Myth, Environmentalism and Communist Control

The Roots of Environmentalism and Population Control

The roots of modern environmentalism and its link to the population control and eugenics movements go back to the eighteenth century and the overpopulation myth, which was all about limiting the human population to prevent a predicted “Malthusian Catastrophe,” i.e. predicted mass starvation when population would surpass the ability of the land to produce enough food, and eugenics to promote genetic purity, especially control of supposedly genetically inferior groups, for example certain races, cultures, and the chronically poor or ill. These beliefs are supported by the progressive belief in materialism—there is no spiritual side, only the material we can see and touch, and humanism—man is the measure of everything and determines morals to suit his circumstances so that there are no absolute moral principles. From these eighteenth century progressive philosophies grew socialism, Communism, fascism, evolutionary racism, the eugenics movement, the population control movement, and environmentalism; all of them are about controlling the masses by an elite few, and all are basically anti-human, anti-development, and anti-freedom.

Today more enlightened geneticists and the public in general (but apparently not by powerful population control supporters) have rejected the eugenics argument that certain races, cultures, and the poor are genetically inferior. Claims of eminent mass starvation from overpopulation made by population control alarmists have been refuted by vastly improved food production rates and capacities. Unwilling to abandon their aim of reducing population, environmentalism, with its daughter Climate Change, is the latest cause celebre to cover brutal inhumanity to man in the form of forced or coerced population control and denial of vital infrastructure to the poorest countries.

Climate change campaigns have an added benefit for environmentalists because it imposes guilt and fear, not just on the poor but on prosperous people in developed nations as the cause of the supposed problem. As usual for progressives, they wrongly assume that the size of the proverbial economic pie is fixed so that prosperous nations are falsely blamed for the poverty of less developed ones. Developed nations are also presented as the major cause of pollution and warming. This fits in with the communist and socialist, so-called progressive, goals to regress all human progress, defeat Western free market economies and maintain control by an elite few “experts.”

**************************************************************************

If you like this post share it with your friends, and sign up to follow this blog by email. Thank you.

The book: Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries will be published in October, 2018. Print and e-book will be available online and in bookstores.

My first book, Perverted Truth Exposed: How Progressive Philosophy has Corrupted Science was published in 2016. It is available in print and e-book, on line only, through World Net Daily store, Amazon, Books-A-Million and Barnes & Noble.  See the companion blog at www.realscienceblog.com  for related posts and pages.

 

Saving Africa from Lies that Kill – new book coming in October 2018

SAVING AFRICA FROM LIES THAT KILL: HOW MYTHS ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND OVERPOPULATION ARE DESTROYING THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES

My new book reveals the abuses of developing countries by international organizations, based on the overpopulation myth and false assumptions about genetic inferiority and environmental damage.  Learn how you can help to end these practices and bring these cultures into the twenty-first century.

 

New book to be published in October, 2018

Back cover:  In Saving Africa From Lies That Kill, Kay Kiser exposes the long-standing crimes committed against developing nations by the United Nations, World Bank, USAID and Planned Parenthood. Under their guise of “aid,” these organizations mire the underprivileged in isolation, poverty, sickness and ignorance.

In her book, Kiser argues:

    • Poverty, not overpopulation, causes environmental damage.  Higher standards of living and lower infant mortality can improve the environment and stabilize the population.

    • Developing nations need access to reliable electricity in order to end energy poverty. This will, in turn, provide clean water, develop transportation, and power hospitals, homes and industrial investment.

    • Africans aren’t lazy; they’re weakened from malaria, parasites and dysentery. They need insect and disease control for a healthy workforce.

    • The Green Revolution and modern agriculture can feed everyone and end deforestation. 

available in bookstores and online, in paperback or e-book in october. Preorder on Amazon now.
Second in the modern mythology series

History of Africa – Early Colonial Period

Africa was divided up between European powers which thought they were superior to Africans, who were assumed to be genetically inferior and in need of being “taken care of” by superior “civilized” peoples.  Unfortunately, colonial powers failed to develop the infrastructure, the economy and to educate the people, so Communists found it easy to enslave the people while tearing down existing systems in the name of independence, without preparing the people for building a better one.  In many ways, this same belief system of inferiority and hopelessness is responsible for the continuing deprivation and abuses based on eugenics, the overpopulation myth and environmental myths that value wildlife and “saving the planet” over developing indigenous peoples and their economy. Poverty, not overpopulation, causes environmental damage. Developing a healthy, educated workforce and a strong economy make is possible for indigenous peoples to care for their environment. See short article below about the European partition of Africa from the Oxford Reference website.

Berlin Conference of 1884–1885 Meeting at which the major European powers negotiated and formalized claims to territory in Africa; also called the Berlin West Africa Conference. 

The Berlin Conference of 1884–1885 marked the climax of the European competition for territory in Africa, a process commonly known as the Scramble for Africa. During the 1870s and early 1880s European nations such as Great Britain, France, and Germany began looking to Africa for natural resources for their growing industrial sectors as well as a potential market for the goods these factories produced. As a result, these governments sought to safeguard their commercial interests in Africa and began sending scouts to the continent to secure treaties from indigenous peoples or their supposed representatives. Similarly, Belgium’s King Leopold II, who aspired to increase his personal wealth by acquiring African territory, hired agents to lay claim to vast tracts of land in central Africa. To protect Germany’s commercial interests, German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, who was otherwise uninterested in Africa, felt compelled to stake claims to African land.

Inevitably, the scramble for territory led to conflict among European powers, particularly between the British and French in West Africa; Egypt, the Portuguese, and British in East Africa; and the French and King Leopold II in central Africa. Rivalry between Great Britain and France led Bismarck to intervene, and in late 1884 he called a meeting of European powers in Berlin. In the subsequent meetings, Great Britain, France, Germany, Portugal, and King Leopold II negotiated their claims to African territory, which were then formalized and mapped. During the conference the leaders also agreed to allow free trade among the colonies and established a framework for negotiating future European claims in Africa. Neither the Berlin Conference itself nor the framework for future negotiations provided any say for the peoples of Africa over the partitioning of their homelands.

The Berlin Conference did not initiate European colonization of Africa, but it did legitimate and formalize the process. In addition, it sparked new interest in Africa. Following the close of the conference, European powers expanded their claims in Africa such that by 1900, European states had claimed nearly 90 percent of African territory.

by Elizabeth Heath for Oxford Reference

http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195337709.001.0001/acref-9780195337709-e-0467

*********************************************************************

If you like this post share it with your friends, and sign up to follow this blog by email. Thank you.

The book: Saving Africa from Lies that Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries will be published in October, 2018. Print and ebook will be available online and in bookstores.

My first book, Perverted Truth Exposed: How Progressive Philosophy has Corrupted Science was published in 2016. It is available in print and ebook, on line only, through World Net Daily store, Amazon, Books-A-Million and Barnes & Noble.  See the companion blog at www.realscienceblog.com  for related posts and pages.

 

New Book Reveals how Developing Countries are Kept Poor and Controlled

 

New book to be published in September, 2018

Back cover:  In Saving Africa From Lies That Kill, Kay Kiser exposes the long-standing crimes committed against developing nations by the United Nations, World Bank, USAID and Planned Parenthood. Under their guise of “aid,” these organizations mire the underprivileged in isolation, poverty, sickness and ignorance.

In her book, Kiser argues:

    • Poverty, not overpopulation, causes environmental damage.  Higher standards of living and lower infant mortality can improve the environment and stabilize the population.
    • Developing nations need access to reliable electricity in order to end energy poverty. This will, in turn, provide clean water, develop transportation, and power hospitals, homes and industrial investment.
    • Africans aren’t lazy; they’re weakened from malaria, parasites and dysentery. They need insect and disease control for a healthy workforce.
    • The Green Revolution and modern agriculture can feed everyone and end deforestation. 

Draconian Climate Change Policies Making World Hunger Worse

DRACONIAN Climate Change Policies Making World Hunger Worse

Climatism

World Hunger UN Climate policyClimate policies are diverting resources from measures that directly reduce hunger, which according to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation is on the rise. | The Australian

ANTHROPOGENIC “climate change” and the control of carbon dioxide, via the supply of energy, has deep roots in a radical yet gravely misguided campaign to reduce the world’s population.

A misanthropic agenda engineered by the environmental movement in the mid 1970’s, who realised that doing something about “global warming” would play to quite a number of its social agendas.

THE goal was advanced, most notably, by The Club Of Rome (Environmental think-tank and consultants to the UN) – a group of mainly European scientists and academics, who used computer modelling to warn that the world would run out of finite resources if population growth were left unchecked.

The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, 

View original post 1,207 more words