Carbon Capture - Coming to a Heat Source Near You

There may be people who truly doubt that CO2 contributes to climate change. I am not one of them.

I've recently become aware of an organization called Global Thermostat that has developed a technique for carbon dioxide capture that has the ability to make most power plants  - and indeed any sort of plant that produces waste heat with a temperature at or near 100 Centigrade - carbon negative.

It does this by exposing a propriety coated ceramic lattice to the atmosphere. The coating selectively binds CO2 which is trapped until it is released by steam generated by the waste heat (or any other source of heat).

The link to this group is:

http://globalthermostat.com

I have seen the demonstration machine and it is impressive. I am also certain that improvements will be made. The existence of this technology ought not lure anyone into a sense of false security. It will take a long long time to roll out this technology and it will come at a cost.

Furthermore - capturing the carbon is only half of the "cure". The other half of the solution is to store the carbon in some fashion. Some of the areas that are being explored are - pumping the collected gas into limestone formations, oil wells, or other geological formations. Another use of the CO2 might be in  enhancing the growth of crops or making fuels.

According to the founders,  Graciela Chichilnisky and Peter Eisneberger, even if the world makes major strides in slowing emissions the concentration of CO2 will continue to rise and will remain high well into the future. It is their contention that this technology can actually reduce the CO2 concentrations to levels more in line with those in early industrial times.

This is an idea worth following and supporting.

Using Brownfields and Power Line Right of Way for Solar Arrays

One of the challenges to developing Solar energy in the heavily populated northeast is finding land that is suitable for solar - and available. Typically there is little available undeveloped land. Clearly Solar can be integrated into existing lands and rooftops -but it is challenging for many reasons.

An alternative is to find land that is unusable for other purposes. In Connecticut four such sorts of land come to mind:

• land under high tension power lines. This land has to be clear cut in order to avoid trees hitting the power lines
• land along Metro North and Amtrack rail lines
• land along highways
• land on landfill and hazardous waste sites. 

The photo below was taken in Massachusetts:

The power lines and rail lines are attractive for several reasons:

• there is a lot of it in Connecticut
• it is relatively protected and secured by virtue of its current use.
• it would be proximate to the major conduits of power
• it would be proximate to a major user of power (the electrified portion of the railway)

A recent article suggests that 20% of the power in the US could derive from these sorts of areas. Please see this link:

http://www.ilsr.org/us-could-get-20-its-power-solar-transmission-line-right-way/

Does anyone have information on a the land area that is covered by these three sorts of uses?

Bringing the Libertarian Voice to the Table - Gun Laws

If you haven't read Bringing the Libertarian Voice to the Table - Overview - please do so - it will take under 5 minutes.

The Libertarian position on guns may be found at the following link:

https://www.lp.org/issues/gun-laws

My synopsis is that Libertarians assert Gun Ownership is not something that ought to be regulated. The LP position harkens back to the colonial desire to have an empowered citizen base. They assert further that the less from the prohibition of liquor in the 20's and 30's is that prohibition doesn't work and indeed creates a world where honest people don't have guns and criminals do. To quote "Foolish politicians and police now seek to ban semi-automatic "assault rifles". They ignore the fact that only honest citizens will comply; criminals will still have them.Such a ban will only increase the criminals' ability to victimize the innocent."

Finally the LP states the guns are not the problem and that the responsibility is on the owner and user of the gun.

Commentary
The LP gives us a background of why the 2nd amendment was written and presents a case for no regulation (if I am overstating that please show me where they have an affirmative position).

This platform is lacking in specificity and doesn't address or recognize the issues that gun control advocates are wrestling to solve. Further more it overstates the efforts of gun control advocates - in no case that I know of are they talking about banning guns - rather they are seeking to ban or restrict access to certain types of firearms.

In the over view to this series of posts I recommend that Libertarians recognize the problem that is on the table. I would recommend that the LP adopt some problem statement.  I also recommend that specific suggestions be made to solve the problem which have the least impact on Liberty. My suggestion is:

Problem Statement
In all too many cases guns have been used in mass shootings. The lethality of these weapons has enabled killers to murder large numbers of people in short time. There are many cases in point but the most horrific cases are Columbine High School, Newtown Connecticut, the Virginia Tech shooting, and the Aurora Theater shooting. In response to each event advocates locally, at the state level, and in the federal government have recommended that certain types of weaponry be banned or restricted, that guns be registered, and that sales be recorded and tracked. 

Some solutions that the LP might endorse (suggestions):

• While the LP desire to protect fundamental liberties it also recognizes that the lethality and effectiveness of weapons today exceeds that of the weapons at the time of the second amendment.  In recognition of this - we support the restrictions in place on machine guns and heavier munitions.
• While guns are neither good nor evil - they are dangerous.Motor vehicles, aircraft, and watercraft are not inherently good nor evil - but they are dangerous to both operators and people in proximity. Licensing is required for them to make certain that the citizen is qualified and capable of operating the machine. The same is true for guns.
• Registration of guns is not a violation of rights - and allows guns to be accounted for.
• The LP does not feel that large clips and semi automatic weapons should be banned. I would recommend that they suggest alternatives in light of the crimes committed in the four shootings above that would address concerns of victims. (While I don't have anything yet to offer there may be people that do).

Summary

I feel strongly that in the case of gun laws - the LP platform is weak and verging on irrelevance because it misstates the position of gun advocates, presents only a defense of rights with no constructive proposals, and does not engage the legitimate goals of gun control advocates. I recommend that the LP formulate a more meaningful response that addresses the concern of gun owners and non gun owners alike by recognizing and stating the problem and making meaningful proposals.

I recognize that my own beliefs make it hard to suggest too many proposals - do any LP members have ideas. I'd love to put them in this post.

Bringing the Libertarian Voice to the Table - HEALTHCARE

If you have not read Bringing the Libertarian Voice to the Table - Overview - please do so before proceeding. It should take under 5 minutes.

The Libertarian platform on healthcare may be found at https://www.lp.org/issues/healthcare.

I summarize the platform contained in the link above:

• Health used to be much more affordable before the government got involved in the 60s.
• The government is now spending 50% of the healthcare dollars in the country.
• Three suggestions:
• Establish Medical Savings Accounts
• Deregulate the healthcare industry
• Remove barriers to safe affordable medicines.

The Libertarian Party wants to harness the power of the free market to help health insurance. This is however easier said than done.

Some additional points that would add to the positions that have been set out (and I encourage the reader to directly review the webpage sited in the link - it will only take a minute).

First the platform needs to recognize and acknowledge that many things BESIDES government intervention are at play and driving the costs upward. Some examples:

• the technology of healthcare is increasing and improving dramatically.  So costs are up - but with reason.
• the population is aging and living longer - both of which increase costs.

Second there are reasons for government involvement -

• the number and percentage uninsured has gone up and the free market was not responding
• the free market needs to operate in a logical framework - the current framework (pre ACA) did not address access or affordability issues. Indeed the incentive were perverse - i.e. encouraging companies to not insure sick people.

Evaluation of Specific Agenda Items:

Establish Medical Savings Accounts 

This is a concrete and valuable suggestion. I support it. However it won't help those who can't afford to save and won't - by itself help access.

Deregulate the Healthcare Industry

This is a very general and non actionable point. It repeals all government policies that increase health costs and decrease the availability of medical services. Most certainly there aren't polices that are self described as existing to decrease the availability of medical service. They may have that effect - but that is not their intent. No doubt though there are many provisions that increase cost. In virtually all cases these are in existence for a reason. If the LP wants to be effective it has to find these policies - explain why they exist - and then prove - assert that we 'd be better off without them. This is possible - but it is a lot of work! I encourage the LP to do this work.

Remove Barriers to safe affordable Medicine

The LP  indicates - using the example of Propranolol - that the Federal Drug Administration - by delaying its approval for 10 years is responsible for 100,000 deaths. Their conclusion is the bureaucratic roadblocks kills sick Americans.

I personally doubt the veracity of the figures - but - for this discussion - accept them. 

What is the fix for the FDA? To make the Propranadol example useful it needs to be explained. If there was literally no reason for the 10 year delay then perhaps criminal action is required. But without knowing what the delay was caused by - it is hard to know how to respond to this suggestion.

Perhaps the LP would disband the FDA - if so who performs their function? 

Perhaps the LP would reform the FDA - if so how?

In summary my evaluation of their three suggestions is that the first one is actionable as is. But the last two are nothing more than broad statements - portrayed as policies choices - that need much much more work before they are actionable.

Points I would make if I were a Libertarian:

• We need to understand why healthcare has been so resistant to the free market solution. It is not solely because of the government. There are many reasons why the FAILURE of the free market in this arena made it necessary to have government intervention.
• Viruses do not respect individual Liberties. Because of that there is a collective interest in having preventive care, vaccinations, etc for as many people as possible. A specific proposal on how to balance individual rights and societal needs for protection from communicable disease would be a great help
• For the reason above - issues of subsidy and affordability come to the fore. If we want to guarantee some level of care - this problem has to be addressed. The ACA has its method - the individual mandate - if the LP can bring forward less restrictive but effective solutions they would be welcomed.
• More to follow….

Comments and suggestions are most welcome