Liberals block renewable energy

Typical Liberals, Democrats, anti-technology Greens, environmentalists and NIMBY's block wind generation and transmission infrastructure.

This article is from the Wall Street Journal August 18, 2008. Link to article : http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121901822110148233.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks
All credit goes to WSJ.

Wind Jammers
August 18, 2008

In this year's great energy debate, Democrats describe a future when the U.S. finally embraces the anything-but-carbon avant-garde. It turns out, however, that when wind and solar power do start to come on line, they face a familiar obstacle: environmentalists and many Democrats.

To wit, the greens are blocking the very transmission network needed for renewable electricity to move throughout the economy. The best sites for wind and solar energy happen to be in the sticks -- in the desert Southwest where sunlight is most intense for longest, or the plains where the wind blows most often. To exploit this energy, utilities need to build transmission lines to connect their electricity to the places where consumers actually live. In addition to other technical problems, the transmission gap is a big reason wind only provides two-thirds of 1% of electricity generated in the U.S., and solar one-tenth of 1%.

Only last week, Duke Energy and American Electric Power announced a $1 billion joint venture to build a mere 240 miles of transmission line in Indiana necessary to accommodate new wind farms. Yet the utilities don't expect to be able to complete the lines for six long years -- until 2014, at the earliest, because of the time necessary to obtain regulatory approval and rights-of-way, plus the obligatory lawsuits.

In California, hundreds turned out at the end of July to protest a connection between the solar and geothermal fields of the Imperial Valley to Los Angeles and Orange County. The environmental class is likewise lobbying state commissioners to kill a 150-mile link between San Diego and solar panels because it would entail a 20-mile jaunt through Anza-Borrego state park. "It's kind of schizophrenic behavior," Arnold Schwarzenegger said recently. "They say that we want renewable energy, but we don't want you to put it anywhere."

California has a law mandating that utilities generate 20% of their electricity from "clean-tech" by 2010. Some 24 states have adopted a "renewable portfolio standard," while Barack Obama wants to impose a national renewable mandate. But the states, with the exception of Texas, didn't make transmission lines easier to build, though it won't prevent them from penalizing the power companies that fail to meet an impossible goal.

Texas is now the wind capital of America (though wind still generates only 3% of state electricity) because it streamlined the regulatory and legal snarls that block transmission in other states. By contrast, though Pennsylvania's Democratic Governor Ed Rendell adopted wind power as a main political plank, he and Senator Bob Casey are leading a charge to repeal a 2005 law that makes transmission lines slightly easier to build.

Wind power has also become contentious in oh-so-green Oregon, once people realized that transmission lines would cut through forests. Transmissions lines from a wind project on the Nevada-Idaho border are clogged because of possible effects on the greater sage grouse. Similar melodramas are playing out in Arizona, the Dakotas, the Carolinas, Tennessee, West Virginia, northern Maine, upstate New York, and elsewhere.

In other words, the liberal push for alternatives has the look of a huge bait-and-switch. Washington responds to the climate change panic with multibillion-dollar taxpayer subsidies for supposedly clean tech. But then when those incentives start to have an effect in the real world, the same greens who favor the subsidies say build the turbines or towers somewhere else. The only energy sources they seem to like are the ones we don't have.

Typical anti-technology hypocritical libs. They are for renewable energy but it cannot be seen or heard. How will electricity be transmitted? Last time I looked, transmission lines are the ONLY way to do this. Do greenies know how electricity is generated and transmitted? Do greenies know that we are using the same electrical transmission lines that were built in the 1950's and hardly any new lines have been built to handle current day electrical loads?

You cannot bury high voltage transmission lines like your buried residential 220V lines that go to your house. It is too hard to maintain and the risks to the people and the grid is too high.

Electricity is the backbone of life here in America.

I guess the greenies do not remember the 2003 blackouts that California was struck with. Electricity from the Pacific North West goes down to California via two high transmission lines. If one of those lines go down, LA and probably the rest of southern California is screwed since the other line cannot handle the load. I doubt the power lines from Nevada/Arizona could handle the load.

In closing, improving an old infrastructure is great and once again the people who would rather let us sit in darkness of the 18th century reveal themselves as liberals. What was the name of that guy who uses 200+ kilowatt hours a month on his house...

Seattle's NIMBY Liberals Bash The Homeless

This sort of proves a theory that I developed years ago, that liberals favor big government because it allows them to avert their eyes from those in need. Isn't that what we pay taxes for?

Many residents in Seattle's affluent Magnolia neighborhood are fuming over plans to house homeless people near Discovery Park at soon-to-be-closed Fort Lawton.

At one community meeting, some residents wondered whether homeless housing at the fort would attract wife-beaters, sex offenders and crack addicts. They rolled their eyes when city officials asserted that such housing increases property values. They worried about the impact on schools and scoffed at the idea of homeless people shopping at the closest grocery — which sells pheasant-and-rosemary pâté for $9.99 and ground coffee for up to $18 a pound.

"We're the ones who live here, and we want to have a nice, safe neighborhood to live in," Donald Raz, a King County deputy prosecutor and Magnolia resident, said later.

Dino Rossi Announces Transportation Plan

I lived in the Washington, DC area from 1985-1997. I experienced some of the worst commutes to work you can imagine.

I lived in the Seattle area from 1997-1999 and experienced equally bad, if not worse commutes (second worst congestion in the country in 1999.)

Here's the difference. When I went back to the DC area in 2005, I-95 and I-395 in Virginia had been dramatically expanded. New lanes, bridges, interchanges, overpasses, etc., had been added. I hardly recognized the roads I used to drive every day. Traffic is still horrible (fourth worst in the U.S. in 2005 according to the Texas Transportation Institute), but how bad would it be had they done nothing?

Meanwhile, virtually nothing has been done to improve SR 167 and I-405 in King County in the 12 years I have lived in Washington, despite rapid population growth.

As I said on the radio yesterday, like Ronald Reagan, I did not leave the Democratic Party, it left me. The Democrats used to be the party of the working man. The Democrats used to be the party of job- and business-creating public works projects, such as dams and bridges, that increased our quality of life and invested in the future. That is no longer the case, particularly in Washington. The Washington Democratic Party may as well be the Green Party. The interests of fish, trees, and snooty latte liberals have come before the interests of the working class.

What could be more important to working people than affordable housing? Yet the Growth Management Act, foisted on us by the Democrats, has made housing unaffordable statewide, particularly in the Puget Sound area. So if you can't afford to live close to work, then you have to commute. Again, the Democratic intransigence to do anything with the road system in the Puget Sound area has forced working people to spend more hours every day in their cars instead of with their families.

Why? Because the attitude is that if we build more roads, then more people will move to Washington. The Greens Democrats want to pull up the drawbridge and seal Washington off from the rest of the world to stop that evil "urban sprawl" (a myth, by the way) and force people into more environmentally-correct public transportation (even though cars stuck in traffic burn more gas and emit more pollution,) which is not practical for most working families. And that's okay with the elitist NIMBYists who want to keep their view of the Olympics uncluttered by tract housing.

The theory didn't pan out, however. Washington has continued to grow rapidly, despite the poor transportation infrastructure, and now the chickens have come home to roost. It's been nearly 20 years since the Nimitz Freeway collapse in Oakland and the Alaskan Way Viaduct still poses a serious risk of killing thousands. The 520 floating bridge likewise could sink in a strong windstorm, possibly killing hundreds. Needed replacement ferries are still on the drawing board. Boeing moved it's headquarters to Chicago. How many more businesses will move out of Washington because of long commmute times and a do-nothing government? We are in gridlock, literally and figuratively. And it affects us in Eastern Washington, because when the Puget Sound catches a cold, we get the flu. Tax dollars that should be going to our transportation needs end up on the west side instead. Remember the 9.5 cent gas tax hike that was supposed to fix all these problems? Yeah....

Rossi's ambitious plan, among other things, calls for the state to spend $15 billion (without raising gas taxes) on a tunnel to replace the Viaduct, widening I-405 from Renton to Bellevue (the road I used to drive every day), and replacing the 520 floating bridge with an eight-lane bridge. This is bold leadership. This is what government is supposed to be about. Come November, Washington voters are going to see the clear differences between Dino Rossi and Chris "Status Quo" Gregoire.

"Some growth is better than none"

One more time, with emphasis. There is no "urban sprawl" on the Palouse. There is no "runaway growth" on the Palouse. The 2006-2007 population data just released from the U.S. Census Bureau shows that the Pullman and Moscow micropolitan areas are growing the slowest of any urban area in Washington and Idaho respectively, two very fast-growing states.

Our problem is just the opposite of "sprawl." We cannot "afford to be choosy" as some advocate. We cannot allow unproven concerns over a poorly understood water source be the nails in the coffins of our two towns. We cannot let the Palouse become a social engineering laboratory for academics and students who will be somewhere else in five or ten years. Instead, we had better do everything we can to encourage growth and roll out the red carpet to any business that wants to locate here. As UI prof Jeff Harkins always says, towns grow or they die. This is the conclusion the Daily News editorial board reached in a column published in last Thursday's edition:

Growth has long been a controversial topic in Moscow and Pullman.

Some want it at any expense, others would like the status quo maintained in perpetuity.

We think the correct approach is somewhere in the middle, and that's why recently released statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau are cause for concern.

The Moscow and Pullman "micropolitan" areas - urban cores of 10,000-50,000 people and the surrounding counties - grew 0.5 percent and 1.2 percent, respectively, from mid-2006 to mid-2007.

That's not far from negative 0.5 percent and 1.2 percent, and that's what is most troubling.

Negative growth would cause a downturn in the local economy, resulting in the loss of jobs and local businesses and forcing some residents to leave the area in search of other opportunities.

Stagnation might produce similar results considering the basic cost of living - gas, groceries, energy - is only going to rise. Money to offset that rise is needed in the form of new jobs and residents.

Further complicating matters is declining enrollment at the University of Idaho. There currently are 9,980 students enrolled at the UI's Moscow campus, down 702 students from fall 2006.

UI economist Steve Peterson said there's a direct correlation between the number of students and the number of jobs in the area.

"If you're down 1,000 students, you can figure a loss between 500 and 1,000 jobs anywhere in the region," he said.

Imagine what would happen if Washington State University saw a similar decrease in enrollment.

A number of area business leaders and elected officials are encouraging growth, and residents need to get on board if they want their children and grandchildren to be able to live and work on the Palouse when they grow up, graduate and enter the work force.

The speed and direction in which the area expands might not agreeable to everyone, but growth at any pace is a far cry better than no growth at all.

"Socio-Cultural Characteristics of the Palouse Basin"

You're really going to enjoy this particular piece of professorial fluffery. It demonstrates considerable academic laziness, liberal bias, greatly oversimplified generalizations, and a general surrender to popular stereotypes. It's from the Palouse Basin Community Water Resource Information System, part of the Water Resources Program at the University of Idaho which provides a "platform for cross-disciplinary analyses of water resources sustainability within the eastern Palouse Basin watershed of western Latah County, Idaho, and eastern Whitman County, Washington."

I have highlighted what I consider the biased parts below:

A large proportion of rural residents in the area, especially those living outside of its population centers, were born in the Basin. Their customs and lifestyles are typical of those found in rural areas of the West, in that they tend to have resource-based and land-production occupations, and are comparatively more conservative in their values and perspectives. One crude indicator of this social characteristic is the number of campaign contributions made by residents of Colfax, WA, in the 2004 election: all but one were made to the Republican Party or its candidates – in a state where a minority (46%) of voters voted for George W. Bush in the 2004 presidential election.

However, in the Idaho portion of the basin’s rural areas, an exception is that some proportion of rural landowners either are faculty of the two universities or professionals attracted to the university-town of Moscow, and thus comparatively more liberal and affluent than their neighbors -- or they are even more liberal residents who have been attracted to the area as part of the back-to-the-land movement that began in the 1970's. One indicator of this social characteristic is the proportion of voters in Latah County that voted for George W. Bush in the 2004 presidential election – 50% -- in contrast to a state in which a majority voted for Bush (69%).

It might also be noted that a major segment of the Moscow and rural Latah County population, given a more liberal political orientation and the fact that they have come from other more populated, congested and poorly planned areas of the country, are more concerned than other residents with growth management and the use of government and public policy to advance economic and community development in a way that they see as being progressive and well-planned. Some are opposed to certain kinds of economic activity (e.g., "big-box" retail stores) and have been labeled by others as "anti-growth."

In contrast, some residents of the Basin, especially in rural Whitman County, are more conservative in their beliefs and preferences, and some (including many farmers in the region) are among the region’s most conservative, especially in comparison to their fellow citizens on the "west-side" of the state of Washington and in Latah County. These individuals tend to believe that the less government involvement in citizens’ lives, the better, and they espouse principles of free-market economics, despite the subsidies that some receive from the federal government. Of particular relevance for water resource management, they are generally in favor of community development through increased economic activity (i.e., "pro-growth"), and would like to see their communities grow in terms of the basic industries and retail outlets available for local services, consumer choices and purchasing options, and general local prosperity, through the jobs, income and economic expansion generated.

So, I guess we can interpret from that we conservatives are in favor of "poor planning" and "wasting water?"

And while there is some truth to this assessment, categorizing people as "anti-growth" and "pro-growth" by who voted for Bush and who voted for Kerry is embarassingly simplistic, insulting, and just plain wrong.

I know MANY Democrats who are in favor of Wal-Mart in Pullman. Pullman is around 55% Democrat, and yet Judy Krueger of PARD lost overwhelmingly in the 2005 city council race. I'm sure many of those folks who voted against Krueger voted for Kerry the year before.

Moscow is also strongly Democratic, yet the city council members who opposed big boxes were thrown out en masse last November. The same council that approved the Hawkins water deal went on a few weeks later to uphold a controversial measure granting health benefits to "domestic partners" of city workers, including those of the same sex, in violation of Idaho law. "Conservative?" You tell me.

On the flip side, I know of many conservatives who strongly oppose big-box stores in both Pullman and Moscow. And Whitman County is not underdeveloped because the Democrats have been in control all these years. Whitman County government has largely been a Democrat-free zone for a long time. No, it is in large part due to those farmers mentioned above who fear suburban development intruding into rural areas. In Pullman, it was business owners that chased away the Palouse Mall.

Until recently, Democratic Latah County had been the center of retail and housing development on the Palouse. Republican Whitman County had developed the anti-growth reputation. The opposition to big boxes is a coalition that spans political parties, the unholy alliance of liberal fascists and NIMBYists. The common thread with each group is that they want the government to decide what other people can do with their land. The NIMBYists just tend to be a little more quiet about it.

As an information system for those making decision about water, this seems to be a very poor resource. You would think they could do their homework and conduct some meaningful surveys on political attitudes about growth on the Palouse. They probably wouldn't like what they found.

"High-tech hits its stride"

Like Gerard Connelly, B.J. Swanson cannot be that ignorant of economics and be the vice president of a bank. I'd like to think that all the nonsense she expresses in this Lewiston Tribune article from yesterday is just claptrap for the masses to cover her left-wing snobbery. But nevertheless, let's hang her with her own words, shall we?

"The economy on the Palouse is stagnant?" The article states that between 1997 and 2007, the number of high-tech jobs increased from 322 to 460 in Latah County. That represents about 43% growth in 10 years. Not spectacular, but not exactly stagnant either.

Whitman County now has 1,363 high-tech, including 1,100 at SEL, which had 230 employees in 1997. That means the growth of jobs at SEL has been 380% over 10 years. That is spectacular sustained employment growth probably unequaled anywhere in the U.S., much less a rural county.

Has other growth in Whitman County kept pace? Swanson says that "each high-tech employee supports as many as four other jobs." So the growth at SEL alone should have created 3,480 new retail/service jobs on the Palouse, including about 1,392 in Whitman County (some 40% of new SEL employees live in Pullman/Whitman County.) There has not been anything like that amount of retail/service jobs created here in the last 10 years. The only thing "stagnant" in Whitman County is the retail sector.

According to the Washington Employment Security Department, there were 1,227 retail trade jobs in Whitman County in January 2008. That's DOWN from January 2000 when it was 1,250. You can see why retailers are so interested in the Palouse, particularly our side of the border. Can't Swanson and the Tribune reporter runs these numbers themselves and see the need for Wal-Mart and other retail? Exactly why is B.J. Swanson being allowed to speak for Pullman and Whitman County anyway? It's very biased reporting.

In what way does the effort, in Whitman County anyway, to capture these dollars by building a Wal-Mart believes keep us from "realizing more of our potential" in the high-tech sector? It's just the opposite. I mean if people make $50,000 a year, they're going to want to spend it somewhere, right? Trust me, if we had more retail amenities, SEL and other companies would have an easier time attracting potential employees. Swanson obviously forgets Ed Schweitzer is a big supporter of a Pullman Wal-Mart.

Yet liberal fascist Swanson claims that Wal-Mart is a threat because every time a new store or restaurant opens, another closes. Really? Is that why we have two Safeways, two Rite-Aids, two Les Schwabs, two Radio Shacks, two Subways, two Pita Pits, two Pizza Huts, four McDonald's, two Arby's and untold Starbucks in Pullman and Moscow? What closed in Moscow when Old Navy and Bed Bath and Beyond opened? Did Staples close when Office Depot opened? Did Snap Fitness and Absolute Fitness close when the Pullman Athletic Club opened? I would sure hate to ask Swanson for a business loan with a ridiculous zero-sum attitude like that.

High-tech hits its stride

MOSCOW - A building under construction at the east edge of Alturas Technology Park is one of the most tangible signs of the slow but steady growth of the high-tech sector on the Palouse.

The 10,000-square-foot building will house Alturas Analytics and Anatech Labs, which have outgrown their 7,200-square-foot space at the park in Moscow.

Anatech Labs began in 1992, doing water tests and other environmental work. About eight years ago its founders brought in a new partner and diversified into doing pharmaceutical testing under the name of Alturas Analytics.

Others are thriving too.

Economic Modeling Specialists is on the verge of outgrowing its leased space in Alturas. And EcoAnalysts is preparing to more than triple its office space with a move from downtown Moscow to Eastside Marketplace (see related stories), where it will be near another home-grown, high-tech Palouse venture, First Step Internet.

It's the kind of economic development that represents the brightest hope for Moscow and Pullman, says B.J. Swanson, commercial loan officer and vice president of AmericanWest Bank. "That's our quickest and easiest way to provide good-paying jobs."

Between 1997 and 2007, the number of high-tech jobs increased from 322 to 460 in Latah County, while Whitman County now has 1,363. The growth there reflects that of Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, which in 1997 had 230 employees and now has 1,100 in Pullman, making it the second-largest manufacturer in the region.

Swanson believes more of the potential in the sector could be realized if members of the community focused on high-tech job growth more and worried less about real estate development and where Wal-Mart might locate.

The kinds of jobs the high-tech sector provides would strengthen weak spots in the economy at a time when it's unlikely significant expansion will occur at the universities, Swanson says.

Part of the reason Wal-Mart is such a threat is the economy on the Palouse is stagnant, Swanson says. Every time a new store opens, another closes. The same pattern happens with restaurants.

Each high-tech employee supports as many as four other jobs because the wages are so high and much of the revenue the companies generate comes from out of state, Swanson says.

The average pay of the 150 jobs at Alturas, where many of Moscow's high-tech businesses are located, is $50,000 a year, Swanson says.

The proximity to universities has made the success possible. Almost every high-tech company has some link to the universities, Swanson says.

The founder of SEL earned his doctorate from Washington State University. Basic research at the universities formed the foundation of other companies.

Once companies are up and running, the universities and Lewis-Clark State College provide a steady source of qualified applicants for the internships and jobs they have, Swanson says.

The availability of internships on the Palouse helps the schools because their students get on-the-job training and take classes in the same semester since they're not having to leave the area, Swanson says.

"It's our future if you look at our base and the assets the universities bring."

Song of My Selfishness

Janet Richards' Town Crier tripe in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News amply illustrates well why the "progressives" are now in the political wilderness in Moscow. Who can take people this disdainful seriously? It is this same upper class, highly educated drawbridge selfishness that adds $200,000 to the price of Seattle homes.

WARNING: Do not click "Read More" if you are subject to nausea caused by overly florid prose, preening intellectual pretentiousness, tortured logic, asinine allegories, naturalist hyberbole, gratuitous use of adjectives, or haughty classical music references:

Importance of community-shared values

Cows graze behind the supermarket and wheat fields roll for miles in the alley behind our shopping center in Moscow. It's a lonely stretch of road - a soothing respite from the traffic and frenetic animation of the parking lot on the front side of the mall.

Drivers are discouraged from taking this route by a series of lofty speed bumps, installed to assure that only a limited number of cars will clog the delivery lane. The bumpy pavement forces a slower pace and provides a kind of rhythm to the journey, so the occasional jostle is never too much of a surprise. I like knowing what to expect.

The conspicuous evidence of consumption litters this corridor. Stacks of wooden pallets, torn shrink wrap and plastic strapping bands lie discarded - the common refuse of retail operations. Battered Dumpsters, with Smurf-colored paint, bulge with cardboard and packing peanuts resting against drab cinder block walls which form the "backside" of a marketplace filled with glitter and glitz.

The peaceful pasture that lays on the other side of this alley seems out of place. It's a bucolic scene, in stark contrast to the commercial setting that is its backdrop; a metaphor for the clash between the push for development and its opposition.

One day as I began the slow traverse of this undulating path I turned the radio to classical. The music was lilting, and beautiful, but I felt unsettled, my mind troubled by thoughts of the natural landscape on one side of the alley that seems headed for obliteration - threatened by the encroaching ooze of molten asphalt hardening into a permanent tomb and the relentless proliferation of retail outlets that have already scourged the nation.

Countless other towns have been swept up in the now familiar pattern that comes on the winds of progress. A trend favoring a homogeneous market saturated with global franchises housed in immense buildings with the offer of generic predictability. Spewing shrink wrap and clam shell cartons, they operate out of step with the rhythms of the natural world and encourage us to do likewise, causing one to wonder if health of any kind is ever a priority.

Countless towns have seen the destruction of the sense of community that comes in the wake of the big-box phenomena. The marketplace, no longer a meeting place, marches to a global drummer, oblivious to the heartbeat of the community. The anonymous nature of these cart and carry stores only adds to social isolation.

When it comes to the issues of water and Wal-Mart, the residents of Moscow, myself included, are polarized. It's hard to see common ground - the shared soil that is the essence of this community - so near and dear to everyone. But common ground is what we must find to prevent the health of our beautiful natural setting and the relationships that make life so rich and give meaning from falling victim to ideological positions set in stone.

Something rescued me from these somber thoughts that day in the alley. Without warning hundreds of small black birds descended on my car. Swirling, whipping and whirling, they snaked towards me and then away in long symmetrical streams forming layer upon layer of concentric black rings. As if hearing the music, they swept inward and outward, like ribbons in the wind, upward and back around the car in syncopated rhythm. As quickly as they came they vanished, as if sucked by a celestial vacuum.

As I negotiated the last speed bump and turned onto the street to head for home, the radio announcer spoke clearly: "You have been listening to a composition by the French composer Ravel written in 1928. It is titled "Oiseauz Tristes," "The Unhappy Birds."

It was a moment sublime - "coincidental oppositorum." Things that seem separate, even opposed, coincided to reveal an unexpected unity - an unbelievably beautiful experience driving in a littered alley behind a mall illustrating the coming together of two worlds in conflict.

Will our town slide into dissension and mediocrity as so many other towns, unwilling or unable to see the importance of the shared values that will determine its destiny? Is there a way to soar above the staunch opinions and fly together?