A good reason to eliminate the Energy Department and its budget

A recent news release from the Department of Energy titled “Carbon hitches a ride from field to market” reports on government research that discovered crops grown in one state may be consumed in another state, thereby releasing carbon dioxide in a place different from where it was originally sequestered by growing the crops. (The report seems to ignore the fact that produce is imported from Mexico and South America.)

This report is an example of our tax dollars being wasted by foolish, politically correct, totally useless government programs. DOE frets “That geography matters for those who track every bit of carbon on Earth in an effort to estimate the potential impacts of greenhouse gases.” Yes, our government spends time and money keeping track of that, but, as I show in a recent post, “Temperature variations, not humans, control atmospheric CO2 content.”

Apparently the Department of Energy doesn’t have enough real work to do so it wastes resources on nonsense like this study. We should not waste resources, so let’s eliminate one source of waste: the Department of Energy.

See also:

Your Carbon Footprint doesn’t Matter



  1. The Department of Energy consumes more revenue that the combined earnings of all of our oil companies and doesn’t produce one therm or BTU of energy. Get rid of it!

    1. Specifically, hater, this administration has increased domestic oil production by 11 percent.
      You are ignorant of the revenues of energy companies.

  2. Aj, you are nuts bud.

    This is dishonest. Its clear you didnt bother reading the article. In the article –

    The source of the information was http://www.biogeosciences.net/

    and then there was this …

    To more accurately reflect the carbon reality of today’s agricultural crops, West and his co-authors combed through extensive data collected by various government agencies such as the Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Census Bureau and the Environmental Protection Agency.

    and this …

    This research was funded by NASA through the North American Carbon Program.

    Frankly, the work looked well worth doing.

    By the way, sorry, but your comment …

    …as I show in a recent post, “Temperature variations, not humans, control atmospheric CO2 content.”

    … is utter tripe. That was the sloppiest piece you have done and frankly doesnt get within spitting distance of what I would consider science. Absolutely shoddy thinking start to finish.

    And it was wrong.

    I’ve asked this before and I’m asking it again … who funds your time?

  3. Soooooo, you think the Energy Department should be eliminated, do you?  Well, let me tell you what the Energy Department has done in just the last two years on behalf of the American people.  It has invested in……more fuel-efficient cars
    …more powerful batteries
    …clean coal technology
    …clean energy research
    …safer nuclear technology
    …centrifuge technology
    …oil and gas exploration and expansion
    …the weatherization of homes
    …a smart electricity grid
    …numerous renewable energy projects and plants
    …numerous energy efficiency programs
    …fuel cell technology
    …”cool roof” technology
    …better building insulation
    …more efficient oil and gas development
    …geothermal technology
    …biofuels and biomass technology
    …tidal power
    …flywheel technology
    …innovative ecosystems
    …ethanol technology
    …hydropower technology
    …numerous solar energy projects
    …numerous wind farm projects
    …CO2 recycling technology
    …energy storage systems
    …reduction of energy costs
    …natural gas vehiclesThe above list could be made far more specific, but lack of space in your website forbids it. But, hey, you don’t have to believe me.  If you care to educate yourself and thus pull yourself out of that hole of ignorance you’ve dug for yourself, then merely go to Google News and type in “Energy Department”, followed by any of the terms I’ve listed above, and you MIGHT learn something.  Notice the emphasis.

    1. All those things should be done in the private sector, not by government. And if you read more articles on my blog, you MIGHT learn something too.

      1. Which then would lead us into something like the situation in Bolivia wherein the attempt was made to privatize water.  Just one example why it is absolutely necessary for government to retain the power to regulate business, something which is rapidly slipping away.   

        “Business is not the solution; business is the problem.”

        and the most feared words ever:  “I’m from megacorp, and I’m here to service your account”

      2. Sounds much better than “I’m here from the Department of Revolutionary Purity. I’m here to discuss your case.”

    2. Your laundry list of DOE pork projects are the result of Obama’s stimulus package, which added roughly 75% to Energy’s annual budget in 2009 and 2010.    Most of that money was spent on grants and contracts, related to expanded use of inefficient and costly renewable energy sources, hybrids , smart grid and “scientific research” in academia.   In 2010 alone, Energy’s budget including stimulus money, was nearly $50 billion.  For the benefit of all Americans, or to serve the interests of greenies-rent seekers  looking for government handouts, under theheading  “save the planet” ?

      1. Domestic oil production was increased.
        Do you have any idea just how much ALL energy is subsidized?
        Bush stuck you … yeah you … with over 2 trillion in unfunded tax breaks, several trillion in wars and another trillion or so in unfunded gifts to the drug companies. Four or five trillion on your back. And you are upset about 50 billion in research?
        Its Obama isnt it? Well, I’m a social democrat and I cant stand the corporatist swine either.

      2. Social democrat, huh?  Well then,  that explains why you have no problem with our country going into debt over its head for useless pork like this and lowering our credit rating for the first time in our history.  Yes, all energy is subsidized, but put the spending orgy on green energy  into perspective.  While producing only a fraction of less than 1% of total output US,  solar energy costs 10-20 times per kWh and is subsidized 50-100 times per mWh more than traditional energy sources;   wasteful, costly, and unnecessary.
        Renewables will never replace cheap and efficient fossil fuels, and government intervention on behalf of  in so-called “clean energy” is useless folly.

      3. Investment in research isnt useless. Without research, you would be living under a tree eating grubs with bad teeth – and walking.
        We went into debt over our heads under republicans. Most recently Bush – 4 to 5 trillion bucks worth of unpaid for programs including legendary tax breaks that didnt produce jobs. The US credit rating was destroyed by the extreme right including the tea party when they decided to extort the government for their votes.
        Do you understand that when you have AAA rated credit that anyone will lend you money? The right screamed economic armaggedon WHILE we had a AAA rated credit and extorted symbolic measures (and attempted to extort even more tax breaks) in exchange for their votes. Somehow I doubt you understand just how idiotic that was.
        The right caused this on the facts – and you will blame anyone but the right. Hysterical.
        Money is symbolic labor and nothing more. It represents a part of a workers life and as such is precious and needs protecting.
        Working credit makes sense. Conservative debt to fund non job creating tax breaks for the rich doesnt. Putting money into the economy so local small business can actually do business makes sense. Fighting oil wars in Iraq at a cost of multiples of a trillion bucks doesnt.
        Conservatives are spending your tax dollars to expatriate your jobs to China. How do you feel about that?
        Conservatives BELIEVE that the economy needs to contract as it comes out of a terrible recession (which they caused by jiggering the housing market and allowing the financial markets to do whatever they wanted without oversight) – by radically cutting spending and therefore more jobs are lost. (Or were you not paying attention to the effect of even a few days of the FAA shutdown)

      4. Things will change, Richard.  All the ranting by all the fearful in all the world can never stop change. 

      5. I know change can’t come soon enough for you, but you will look like Willie Nelson in sandals  long before it does.  

  4. “Socialism is a philosophy of  failure, the  creed of ignorance, and the gospel of  envy, its  inherent virtue is the equal sharing of  misery..” — Winston  Churchill

    1. … Churchill was a smart guy. He talked the US into attempting to restore the British Empire by invading Africa first rather than Europe directly.
      “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery..” – Winston Churchill
      And for the record – this could be the dictionary definition of ad hominem humina humina …

    2. “Communism… is the genuine resolution of the antagonism between man and nature and between man and man; it is the true resolution of the conflict between existence and essence, objectification and self-affirmation, freedom and necessity, individual and species. It is the riddle of history solved and knows itself as the solution.” – Karl Marx

      See, Andrew; we have quotes too.

      1. “It is the riddle of history solved and knows itself as the solution.”

        That one is just hanging over the plate, waiting for someone to hit an easy ground-rule double off of it.

      2. My point, dog, is that Churchill was indeed a smart guy and a die hard apologist for capitalism.  Uncle Karl was also a smart guy and a die hard apologist for communism.  They both left us impressive quotes.
        Mr. Farley is a die-hard red-baiter that doesn’t understand the first thing about Marxism except that, whatever it is, he doesn’t like it.  Don’t believe me?  Ask him about his understanding of dialectical materialism.
        BTW – baseball metaphors are lost on me.  I know; how typically un-American of me.  And how typically patriotic of farley to not know anything about Marxism.

Comments are closed.