Carbon Trading at COP26

 

COP26 is having a hard time developing a carbon trading market structure, which is bad news for nuclear power. Nuclear power is more expensive than some forms of fossil fueled power plants, but it would be more competitive if there were a real carbon tax on the greenhouse gases emitted by the fossil fuels.  No carbon tax encourages continued release of greenhouse gases. 

According to the Wall Street Journal, Brazil has been receptive to carbon trading proposals at COP26.  However, Bloomberg reports that poorer countries want more money from trading to pay for their costs to adapt to climate change, and the EU objects to giving them part of the funds from carbon credit exchanges between countries. 

There are also efforts to develop carbon trading markets outside of COP26, but a worldwide regime would be a big boost.  Identifying a cost for emitting CO2 seems like one of the best ways to limit it.  Of course, like all laws and markets, enforcement would be a problem. 

Hypersonic Hype

 Foreign Policy magazine has weighed in on the hype about hypersonic missiles. It falls somewhere between my view that hypersonic missile developments are important, and Fareed Zakaria’s view that they are not.

What’s with all the hypersonic hype? “Ballistic missiles already fly at hypersonic speeds, so what makes these weapons so special?” a knowledgeable and nerdy SitRep reader might ask. The key difference is that ballistic missiles follow a nice, easy-to-track trajectory to their target.

But, missile defense systems be warned, hypersonic missiles can change trajectory and maneuver en route to their final targets, making them significantly more difficult to track. Hypersonic missiles are nothing new, but the pace at which both Moscow and Beijing are investing in these programs definitely is. Hypersonic missiles can also travel at five times the speed of sound. 

Two other big issues. Keep in mind: First, both Russia and China reportedly have designs to put nuclear warheads on their hypersonic missiles, unlike the United States. Second, there is currently no international agreement or treaty dedicated to limiting or monitoring hypersonic missiles, meaning absent a new campaign of international arms control diplomacy, we have the perfect recipe for a new three-way arms race.

Polling Is Worthless

 John Heilman looked like an out of touch idiot on “Morning Joe” this morning, as did most of his Democratic diehard colleagues sitting around the table.  The polls on the Virginia governor’s race were off, but the polls on the New Jersey governor’s race had no resemblance to reality.  Whether the Democrat Murphy wins or loses, the polls about the election that had him winning easily were wrong. 

Polling companies in America appear to be corrupt, bought by the Democrats who cite the fake polls everyday in the political punditry.  Based on polls, Hillary Clinton prepared a big fireworks display to mark her victory over Donald Trump in the 2018 presidential election.  Polling data seems to be strongly biased in favor of Democratic candidates, and the Democrats seem to cite polling more than Republicans, since the polling favors them. 

Unfortunately it makes the media and election campaigns look corrupt and undermines public faith in elections and democracy.  Joe Scarborough, John Heilman and the other Democrats are leading efforts against free and fair elections that are as damaging as Donald Trump’s.  America is becoming a third-world country, at least in part due to the Democrats plan to bring in as many third-world immigrants as possible to stuff the ballots for the Democrats. 

Youngkin’s victory, however, shows that there is hope for future elections, despite the Democratic pundits’ efforts to control them.  

Energy Crisis

In his October 21  Washington Post column and his CNN GPS broadcast, Fareed Zakaria discussed how renewable energy sources are failing to completely replace fossil fuels.  His failure to examine the role of nuclear power reactors is a serious oversight.  His only mention of nuclear is to note that Germany eliminated coal, gas and nuclear power sources before it was ready to replace their production. 

Merkel’s decision to get rid of nuclear power in Germany in 2011 because of its bad reputation after the Fukushima nuclear accident, but before she was ready to replace it, illustrates the irrational opposition of environmentalists to nuclear power. 

The New York Times 2011 article reporting on Merkel’s decision reported on the response from German energy companies:

Another factor is the likelihood that Germany, which already gets more than one third of its natural gas from Russia, will grow more dependent. 

The government acknowledges that natural gas and coal-fired power plants will continue to play a big role. They are, after all, able to provide large chunks of power at any time — unlike solar or wind energy, at least with current storage technology. 

Today in 2021 Germany is facing an energy shortage crisis that can be met mainly by importing expensive, climate-warming, natural gas from Russia.