Daily Archives: April 20, 2014

Uh oh

Slowest start to tornado season on record. Continuing to confound global warmists’ predictions. Interesting that for “settled science”, we’ve seen some of the quietest hurricane seasons, the lowest number of tornadoes and a 17-year pause in global warming, all in contravention of the warmists’ models.

 

chart

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Government: fuel from corn waste worse than gasoline

 

Better living for Dupont

Better living for Dupont

In a government-funded study, researchers concluded that using corn waste for ethanol produced more greenhouse gas emissions than regular gasoline.

WASHINGTON — Biofuels made from the leftovers of harvested corn plants are worse than gasoline for global warming in the short term, a study shows, challenging the Obama administration’s conclusions that they are a much cleaner oil alternative and will help combat climate change.

The conclusions deal a blow to what are known as cellulosic biofuels, which have received more than a billion dollars in federal support but have struggled to meet volume targets mandated by law. About half of the initial market in cellulosics is expected to be derived from corn residue.

The biofuel industry and administration officials immediately criticized the research as flawed. They said it was too simplistic in its analysis of carbon loss from soil, which can vary over a single field, and vastly overestimated how much residue farmers actually would remove once the market gets underway.

“The core analysis depicts an extreme scenario that no responsible farmer or business would ever employ because it would ruin both the land and the long-term supply of feedstock. It makes no agronomic or business sense,” said Jan Koninckx, global business director for biorefineries at DuPont.

Later this year the company is scheduled to finish a $200 million-plus facility in Nevada, Iowa, that will produce 30 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol using corn residue from nearby farms. An assessment paid for by DuPont said that the ethanol it will produce there could be more than 100 percent better than gasoline in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.

The research is among the first to attempt to quantify, over 12 Corn Belt states, how much carbon is lost to the atmosphere when the stalks, leaves and cobs that make up residue are removed and used to make biofuel, instead of left to naturally replenish the soil with carbon. The study found that regardless of how much corn residue is taken off the field, the process contributes to global warming.

“I knew this research would be contentious,” said Adam Liska, the lead author and an assistant professor of biological systems engineering at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. “I’m amazed it has not come out more solidly until now.”

The Environmental Protection Agency’s own analysis, which assumed about half of corn residue would be removed from fields, found that fuel made from corn residue, also known as stover, would meet the standard in the energy law. That standard requires cellulosic biofuels to release 60 percent less carbon pollution than gasoline.

Cellulosic biofuels that don’t meet that threshold could be almost impossible to make and sell. Producers wouldn’t earn the $1 per gallon subsidy they need to make these expensive fuels and still make a profit. Refiners would shun the fuels because they wouldn’t meet their legal obligation to use minimum amounts of next-generation biofuels.

EPA spokeswoman Liz Purchia said in a statement that the study “does not provide useful information relevant to the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from corn stover ethanol.”

But an AP investigation last year found that the EPA’s analysis of corn-based ethanol failed to predict the environmental consequences accurately.

From the “science” to the so-called “remedies”, it’s all a fraud, and all about enriching large corporations, political insiders and professional alarmists.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The Antares boys try a novel legal approach: we were too stupid to know what we were doing

Joe Beninati: "I really am as stupid as I look."

Joe Beninati: “I really am as stupid as I look.”

Joey Bagadonuts Beninati and Jimmy Cabrera lost control of their last possession, 100 West Putnam Avenue, Greenwich, to their creditors last year and are suing to recover management fees they claim are owed them, even though their written contract says otherwise. Here’s a partial transcript of a court hearing in the matter; the judge doesn’t believe them. Had they better counsel, they could have called anyone in Greenwich familiar with their business acumen to back up their claim.

THE COURT: I’m not talking about fraud in the inducement, I’m talking about fraud. You have a clear contract between sophisticated parties, black and white, signed off on. Where is there fraud?

[Counsel for Antares] MR. LEVINE: By making promises — not to fraud in the inducement. By making promises to us that we are entitled to certain — an oral agreement that we’re entitled to certain provisions, notwithstanding what is contained in the language of the agreement. We either have the — we’re either entitled to those things under —

THE COURT: Well, according to this — I believe there’s a merger clause in here stating it’s the entire agreement.

MR. FORTINSKY: Yes there is, Your Honor.

THE COURT: And, in fact, when it talks about amendments it talks about a writing.

MR. LEVINE: Yes. But under the — under New York law you cannot — the merger clause does not apply if — if the party — if one of the parties is reasonably led to believe that there’s something they’re going to be entitled to that they don’t get.

THE COURT: So what good is a merger clause? I never could understand that really.

MR. LEVINE: I’m only relying on New York law which provides that in the event there’s — notwithstanding a merger clause, if one party is frustrated in what their reasonable expectation is under the contract by the conduct of the other party, the merger clause does not preclude them —

THE COURT: It always seemed to me that that sort of says there’s no such thing as a merger clause. But let’s move on, because I really don’t understand that law. Just, I’m too thick.

MR. LEVINE: I try to be guided by the law.

THE COURT: But you’ve got, as I said, very sophisticated parties —

MR. LEVINE: Yes.
THE COURT: — and they’ve signed a contract.

MR. LEVINE: Yes.

THE COURT: Why would a sophisticated party assume things outside of the contract are part of a written

contract?

MR. LEVINE: ….[T]o your point about what — why would a sophisticated party: First, the issue of being a sophisticated party only applies under New York law if the sophisticated party could look to some objective fact to know that what they’re being told is unreasonable —

THE COURT: Well, it applies in all fraud cases, because there’s a reasonable reliance piece to every fraud case —

MR. LEVINE: Right.

THE COURT: — and that’s where it kicks in. So my question is: How could — Even if I would buy this argument, how could a sophisticated businessman, very sophisticated businessperson sign off on a contract and reasonably rely on oral — an alleged oral agreements that fly in the face of the contract language?

MR. LEVINE: The issue of whether or not my client  is dumb –

THE COURT: It’s not dumb, it’s –

MR. LEVINE: No, no, no. Well, it is. Because,Your Honor, because your question assumes that — The flip side to your question is this: What sophisticated businessman would forego $1.6 million  essentially would enter into a contract whereby he would (forego] million he had already earned, which is two years of management agreement — management services …

THE COURT: Doesn’t that happen in business all  the time? Shouldn’t there have been a writing to protect your client?

MR. LEVINE: That comes back to the issue of whether or not they’re dumb. And if I can just finish my point, Your Honor?

THE COURT: But you can’t be dumb in business.

11 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Of Puerto Rican peanut butter and hysterical organic mommies

 

OMG, it's a turkey fed on modified corn!

OMG, it’s a turkey fed on modified corn!

Or, “How neurotic mothers have invaded the playground.”

“Am I going to be an outcast?” A friend, who recently moved to an upscale neighborhood in Madison, Wis., called me last week to ask if she would be able to make mommy friends if she continued feeding her children — gasp! — non-organic food.

She had just come back from the park where two mothers were discussing a recent vacation to a resort in Puerto Rico. One told the other that there, for the first time, her toddler was given Jif peanut butter. He loved it. Prior to that he had only had Whole Foods peanut butter, which (one might guess) pales in comparison for a 3-year-old palate.

When the boy came home and asked for more Jif, his mother told him it wasn’t available — that it was “Puerto Rican peanut butter.”

Wrapped up in that phrase is all of the arrogance and class snobbery of the organic-food mafia. If these moms haven’t come to your neighborhood yet, just wait.

Another mom, a class parent at a preschool in Westchester, told me she was being harassed by one of the other mothers to issue a new rule: Only organic snacks would be allowed in the classroom.

A mom in Washington tells me that she was unable to participate in a number of nanny-share agreements she looked into because the other parents were so crazy about not having their children come into contact with anything non-organic. One mother she met was convinced her child’s ADD became worse when he was exposed to non-organic food. A stray Goldfish or Cheerio might set up off.

But sometimes these parents are not even worried about their own child’s well-being.

They’re worried about yours. The organic foodies are not satisfied with controlling their own family’s dietary habits, they want to “evangelize,” says Julie Gunlock, author of “From Cupcakes to Chemicals: How the Culture of Alarmism Makes Us Afraid of Everything and How to Fight Back.”

20 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Barrista reeducation camp?

 

Latte with attitude, served  with foam

Latte with attitude, served with foam

Prisoners trained to make proper coffee and serve it with a smile. If we would just make rude, inept service a felony, cafes across America would benefit; in 3-5 years.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

If we jailed every government employee who accepted pay while not working, we’d cut the bureaucracy by half

 

I feel my pain!

Leadership, Hawaii: “I feel my pain!”

USPS worker charged with collecting disability benefits for “excruciating, unbearable, constant pain” while spending each summer fishing.  He should have done what his peers do: stay on the payroll as an active “worker”, then gone missing.

5 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized