Global Warming and Energy

A bunch of east coast hurricanes between 1951 and 1960, including several that threatened New York, were much larger than Sandy. Sandy not unprecedented, not even close.

Meteorologists got Sandy right. That's unusual.

It sounds like government is squandering the manpower it has available for search and rescue after Sandy.

"After several days in a holding pattern at Joint Base McGuire-Dix Lakehurst completing training, task force leader Tom Lakamp said it was good to get the members out using their search and rescue skills."
"The task force was not given another mission by the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the local New Jersey authorities as of Saturday. Until members are released by New Jersey authorities as an “asset” for search and rescue missions in that state, they will remain on base, said public information officer Doug Cope."

Why are these people sitting around with no mission? Rhetorical question.

Much of Sandy's "record storm surge" came from it being high tide during a full moon when Sandy hit. The previous record was set at low tide. More on Sandy's storm surge.

Sandy victims face gasoline shortages. Stupid government tries to give away gas for "free" only to immediately run out of supply. In order to avoid shortages, gas suppliers should charge what the market will bear.

Obama's EPA waives gasoline regulations for Sandy victims, tacitly admitting they are obstacles to progress.

Does FEMA really create moral hazard? Does anybody say, it would be too dangerous to live here if not for FEMA?  Government flood insurance creates moral hazard, and people are talking about that, but is that FEMA?

"When coastal states saw that their own resources would be used to repair flood damage, for instance, than political leaders would have stronger incentives to discourage housing development in flood-prone areas and to encourage greater investments in precautions like tree trimming to reduce storm damage."

This is just an argument for trading in one (federal) central planner for another (state).

"But FEMA has another role too: through it, the federal government plays a major role in re-investing in affected areas. Lower Manhattan, for instance, is the home of Wall Street, justifying national intervention through FEMA to get the area back on its feet. But this raises the question of whether it is fair and efficient to take tax dollars collected in one geographic location and redistribute it to a region devastated by disaster. There are surely unintended consequences that come with such implicit insurance. Put bluntly, moral hazard arises as more economic activity is likely to locate in harm's way along the pretty coast. "

This is a much better example, but I think FEMA does even more damage because it hoards resources, making it harder for people to obtain the resources they need before and after a disaster. This guy also buys into the global warming fraud, but at least he's making a couple of good points.

New Jersey Governor Christy attacks people for using prices to match supply to demand. As demand skyrockets during a disaster, prices must follow suit to insure goods are applied to the best purpose. These increased prices also draw goods from all over the country to where they're needed most. Government hinders this process. Lew Rockwell has some more examples.

Here's another way government hinders recovery from a disaster: Christian electricians turned away because they are non-union.

Naturally the lights come back in the plutocrat stronghold of southern Manhattan before any of the boroughs.

"Bloomberg also said that resolving gas shortages could take days."

That's because government is in the way. As Lew said above...

"Of course, if gasoline could be sold at the market price, which is far higher than a week ago, there would be no shortage. Every entrepreneurial guy with a tanker truck, or a fleet of them, would be flooding the area with exactly what the people need."

But no. Instead gas is being held up by government threats of violence.

Bloomberg jumps on the global warming fraud bandwagon.

A science guy who believes in the global warming scam explains that climate models predict a decrease in hurricanes like Sandy, not an increase.

Some frauds are reporting that the Atlantic Ocean has warmed by 5 degrees in the last 50 years. Wrong.

In a naked scam, DP&L asks regulators to allow it to raise prices by $5 per month, supposedly to offset the cost of transitioning to a state market in electricity. But here's the catch:

"The charge is intended to cover the company’s transition period to adjust to a statewide competitive market by 2017 for electric providers, DP&L said. But those customers who remain with the utility as their energy provider should realize enough savings to cancel out the charge, the utility added."

DP&L is admitting that, once it faces competition, five years from now, that prices will fall. It's also admitting it wants to blatantly steal from people in the mean time.

"The company said in filings with the Public Utility Commission of Ohio that the charge would “ensure the company’s financial integrity.” It would generate $600 million over five years, or $120 million annually."

I don't care what they call it. I call it stealing.

"Even with the charge, DP&L said, other parts of the rates would decrease. For example, residential customers using more than a household average would see a decrease, said DP&L spokeswoman Lesley Sprigg. Commercial and industrial customers who remain with DP&L as their electricity supplier should see a decrease of 2 percent to 6 percent, Sprigg said."

Why would rates go down for people who use a lot of electricity. I thought conservation was a good idea.

"A similar request was approved by PUCO in August for AEP that the utility called a “retail stability rider,” but the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel has filed a challenge and the approval could go through another hearing. Duke Energy has also filed for a similar charge."

This is their last few years enjoying their government protected monopolies, so why not shoot for the moon?

IPCC agrees that Mann did not win the Nobel.

Claim that global warming is causing sea levels to rise faster than expected. Really? I remember going to an aquarium about 20 years ago that claimed sea levels would rise by 2 feet by 2020. It's not happening. These guys like to re-write history then claim their predictions were alarmist enough. Of course, even using data biased to incorrectly make it appear sea levels are rising faster than they really are, they're not rising nearly as fast as this guy says.