From
Rush Limbaugh, Jun 16, 2017
RUSH: This
story I just saw, and I wanted to bring it to your attention. It’s from The
Daily Caller. The headline: “Deadly London Tower Fire Fueled By ‘Green Energy’
Rules — London’s Grenfell Tower was made worse by government ‘green energy
requirements’ that allowed fire to rapidly engulf the building Wednesday,
leaving at least 17 people dead and scores more wounded or missing.
“While
it’s unknown what sparked the fire, experts say that the cladding, or exterior
insulation, created a chimney effect through which the fire rapidly spread
upwards. The cladding was added to Grenfell’s exterior in 2015 as part of a
$12.8 million retrofit. ‘I have never seen a fire that has engulfed an entire
building like this in a career of more than 30 years,’
Matt
Wrack, who heads the Fire Brigades Union, told The Telegraph. ‘It could be that
this is the quest for sustainability trumping other concerns,’ echoed Dr. Jim
Glockling of the Fire Protection Association. ‘There has been an emerging body
of evidence surrounding some of the materials being used and now we have an
appalling demonstration of what can happen,’ Glockling said.”
Wouldn’t
that be what, ironic that the green crowd got in there and demanded a
retrofit of this building to enforce sustainable green energy requirements, and
the requirements ended up turning the whole building into a tinderbox? Green
energy rules might have led to it.
I’m
surprised this story even got out. Normally the Drive-Bys in the U.K. would
want to suppress anything anybody out there happens to be saying about
something like this. But, you know, it’s true, if you look in many areas where
green, sustainable energy is being employed, like windmills are killing birds
left and right and causing havoc in communities, and they’re not generating
much power, and it’s a disaster.
The solar
industry is an absolute disaster. The number of panels that you need to create
so little electricity that you can’t really effectively run anything on them.
If you have a cloudy day you’re sunk. And every one of these industries is
wildly subsidized. They couldn’t make it on their own. There simply isn’t a
market for these new sustainable green energy things, wind and solar. By that,
I mean there’s no way to make a profit.
Even Elon
Musk. Elon Musk has been subsidized to over $4 billion. I don’t know if the
young tech crowd even knows it, but Elon Musk did not even found Tesla. Did you
know that? You didn’t know that? No. He bought Tesla from its original
founders. No, it’s not a big deal. I’m just pointing it out. It’s just a little
known fact. But the point is even Musk has gotten over $4 billion in subsidies
in order to make this electric car.
I hear
people raving — Tim Cook at Apple the other day was somewhere and he was
raving. Oh, Apple’s new product. Apple is trying to design software for an
autonomous car, self-driving car. Cook announced that in an interview at
Bloomberg. And let me tell you something as an aside. If Apple is developing
the software and the mechanisms for a self-driving car, then you can bet Apple
is also developing a car.
The one
thing Apple does not do is build software for other people’s stuff. And this is
an edict going all the way back to Steve Jobs. They’re gonna do an iPhone,
they’re gonna own it all. They’re gonna own the hardware. They’re gonna own the
software and they’re gonna eventually own as much in it as they can, and they
are in the process of having their own chip division. The thing is Apple never
writes software for somebody else’s hardware.
So if
they’re building a system for a self-driving car then, by definition, Apple’s
developing their own car as well. Where are they gonna test it? But, anyway,
when he was doing this, he was talking about (paraphrasing), “Isn’t it such a
pleasure to get in your electric car and never have to stop at a gas station. Never
have to stop at a filling station. You get in your electric car and you drive
down the road and every time you pass a gas station, you just wave at ’em
knowing you never have to stop.”
Well, I
mean, I guess that’s cool. But you do have to find some place to park your car
for a number of hours to charge it up. The thing that I don’t get about the
electric car — I actually get it. I just think it’s interesting to point out.
Where do they think the batteries in these cars get their juice? When they plug
those cars in to recharge the batteries, where’s the juice coming from?
Ninety-nine out of a hundred places it’s coming from a coal-fired power plant.
They’re
all opposed to coal. They’re opposed to coal because it’s dirty and it’s filthy
and it pollutes and it’s a dark color. You don’t want it on your clothes, it’s
icky. We don’t like coal, it’s horrible. And yet they couldn’t drive their
electric cars without coal-fired power plants. They tell themselves they are
somehow saving energy and they are developing renewable, clean energy, and yet
it requires coal, clean coal or otherwise, in order to fire up the batteries in
their cars so they can drive past gas stations and wave when they go by.
How do you
rationalize that? How do you on one hand talk of how coal is yesterday’s news,
you hate it, you despise it, it’s dirty, it’s filthy, and then you go out and
design a revolutionary product that cannot operate without it? And then you
never mention coal and you never mention conventional electricity. You just talk
about your brand-new battery tech, which is basically charging in capacity, but
there is no alternative way to get juice onto a battery that does not use a
massive supply of electricity, which still in this country is created mostly by
coal-fired power plants. I think it is gigantic hypocrisy.
Related Links
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2017/06/16/did-green-energy-rules-cause-london-inferno/
No comments:
Post a Comment