Complaints

Saturday 24 July 2021
24 Jul 2021 Posted by Sara Comments: 0 Views: 
electric_bus.jpg
CA Agency May Scrap Electric Bus Fleet After Electric Buses Melt in California Sun, Catch Fire, Cost Too Much to Fix
The electric bus idea is going down in flames – literally.

A California transit official said electric buses manufactured by Proterra are melting in the California heat.

Busses melting?? And one caught fire while it was charging! Besides that, the buses are just too expensive to repair. Imahine that!

All these problems in CA, BUT Biden is still allocating BILLIONS of dollars to expand electric vehicle charging stations.

Like people are going to traves 100 miles (if they can get that far) and then stop to charge the vehicle for several hours.

Metropolatian areas may go for the electric vehicles, but . . . folks in the real USA will not!

To see the rest of this article, click HERE
Monday 31 May 2021
31 May 2021 Posted by SR Editor Comments: 0 Views: 
solar_energy_2.jpg
Nebraska Power Company will Spend $651 Million For Gas Power as Backup For a $397 Million Solar Plant. This could cost the county $975 Million in lost taxable valuation and result in 4,700 few housing units and 11,175 fewer residents and the county may n
Do Utility Companies Have too Much Power and Control?

Nebraska Power Company will Spend $651 Million For Gas Power as Backup For a $397 Million Solar Plant. This could cost the county $975 Million in lost taxable valuation and result in 4,700 fewer housing units and 11,175 fewer residents and the county may not be able to stop the utility company from building the new solar and gas plants.



The post below was written by Dave Begley and posted on his FB page and on the Saunders County Community FB page.
*****************************************************

The Omaha Public Power District is looking to have 500 acres of Nebraska farmland removed from food production for expensive and unreliable solar.

This case really shows how slick the solar developers are. They are organized. The opponents were not able to organize until the last minute.

I won the argument at the Planning Commission level, but the leader of the opponents wanted to hire a Lincoln lawyer for the County Board meeting.

I was able to speak, for a short time, to the Board and made the strongest legal argument which is that the County's own zoning regulations would not allow the granting of the conditional use permit because an industrial solar facility is not in harmony with farms, houses and a cemetery.

The County Board completely ignored its own regulations. In the OWH story, one of the Board members admitted that they wanted the $300k per year in extra tax money. That's the strongest tool (in addition to the appeal for "renewable" energy) that the proponents can make.

I don't know if the opponents will take this case to court, but I think they certainly should.

One of the most interesting things here is that the entire Board is Republicans (the anti-slave party). I really expected better things from them as this permit is clearly contrary to law.

The article Solar farm approved with many conditions attached is completely biased as it totally ignores the best legal argument, that is, the conditional use permit is in violation of section 7.03(5) of the Saunders County zoning regulations.

In other words, this vote was lawless. I expected the all-GOP Board to follow the Rule of Law.
Laughable that Saunders County could get bought off for just $300k per year. Artificial turf for Yutan HS? Ha! What a waste of money.

The important point here is that solar power is so unreliable that backup power MUST be built. A total waste of money.

"At the Saunders County Board hearing regarding Platteview Solar, we heard in passing that OPPD is building two *standby* natgas facilities in Douglas County.

In the Order of the Nebraska Power Review Board dated December 4, 2020, it is disclosed that OPPD will spend $651 million in order to provide backup for the 400 mw in solar that OPPD is planning on building.

These two peaking plants "are typically called upon a relatively small number of days per year."

Order at 12. The Order also states that "solar generating facilities are normally accredited in the 60 to 70 percent range in the summer, and almost zero during winter." Order at 9. Yup, ZERO.

Restated, your consumer-owned OPPD is purchasing expensive and unreliable solar power and has to spend an *extra* $651 million because of the OPPD Board's belief in the Global Warming religion.

We all pay the price for the decades of mismanagement at OPPD.

It sure is easy to spend other people's money; especially when there is no accountability."

By: Dave Begley



Saunders County planners vote against proposed solar farm

Solar farm approved with many conditions attached

OPPD Plans Natural Gas Plant Along Fairview Road

Editors Note:
We included links to news articles, relating to this solar development. They give some background to this story but no article goes into enough details, as if the press does not want the general public to know too much information.

This seems to be a typical policy in America where the Internet Search Engines, News Media and even many Government Officials seem to be hiding certain information from the citizens of our country. That is why we are encouraging the PEOPLE to stand up and speak up. Expose the corruption and dirty secrets.

For example, we have discovered that some solar developers are paying up to $50,000 to people living next door to solar developments in order for them to NOT complain about the solar panels next door. One of the problems with these agreements is an attachment, is placed on the property so that even future owners of the land can not complain or it will cost them $$$$.

Now, we would challenge you to name any other industry that PAYS people not to complain about products that are installed in your community. Doesn’t it make you wonder just what they are hiding?

If you have an article exposing problems with solar developments, please share it with us, so that we can let others discover the real problems with having solar developments next to residential neighborhoods and destroying crop producing land.

Friday 28 May 2021
28 May 2021 Posted by Sara Comments: 0 Views: 
Solar_farm_rhododenrans.jpg
WARWICK, R.I. (WPRI) — Several residents who live alongside a Warwick solar farm said the project they were promised in 2016 was the not the project that was built.
Neighbors of Southern Sky Renewable Energy’s solar farm in Warwick, R.I., read documentation, attended city council meetings and argued for what they wanted for the master plan of the proposed Solar Farm along West Shore Rd. Somewhere between the proposed plan and the final project, those plans changed.

Somewhere in between, the language specifying that Southern Sky Renewable Energy’s solar farm and the neighbors homes would be separated by “substantial screening” — what Laprocina and Hodge said was an agreed upon eight-foot wall of evergreens to help reduce wind and noise — was removed.


Instead of the eight-foot wall of evergreens, after the project was approved, Southern Sky planted one-to-two foot tall rhododendrons.

To read the article, click on the following link: Broken Promises
Thursday 18 March 2021
18 Mar 2021 Posted by Sara Comments: 0 Views: 
Camblell_VA.jpg
Residents Complain over Campbell County, VA, Road Damage Caused by heavy Machinery going to Solar Project Site
Campbell County, VA, has issued six stop-work orders since June of 2020 to an AZ-based engineering and construction firm building a solar farm.

Besides that, there have been 26 notices of violations.

Residents are filing complaints against the county, Dept of Transportation and Dept of Environmental Quality over the road conditions in the area. The road used for trucks going to the construction site has potholes, the shoulders are damaged and the road is constantly muddy.

The Environmental Manager stated that the size of the project is probably to blame. The project is on 1,200 acres of land and about 600 to 700 acres will become a solar field.

"The Virginia erosion and sediment control regulations are approximately 30-years-old. They are only designed to be 60% effective when they are installed correctly, so going back to the scale and size of a project, when our erosion and sediment control laws were written and adopted they weren’t thinking about hundreds of acres being disturbed at one time” Stokes said. “When these folks see what’s happening in their back yards or front yards, I can understand why they may think, ‘well the county isn’t doing anything about it,’ but when our regulations and laws are structured to only be at a 60% efficiency, then that’s 40% that’s allowed."

Since this Solar Farm Construction Project was issued "DOZENS of violations and stop-work orders," Yet they continue to move forward on their construction. This is a typical example of Solar Developers and their out of town construction crews not caring about the local communities or property. We NEED to stop this crap from destroying our small towns and rural communities, all in order to line a few pockets with extra greenbacks.

To read the entire article, click here
Wednesday 04 November 2020
troysolar1.jpg
install products that have a history of creating fires and contain toxic hazardous chemicals that can be contaminate the ground water, fence off my property on all four sides, thus blocking off wildlife from my watering holes
Why having a solar farm next door is such an emotional event.
OR
Not all houses are homes.

By David H.

Since some people that choose to live in a condo or apartment do not seem to understand why certain individuals living in the country might be against having a solar farm next door to them, I thought I would take a few moments to share my personal perspective.

Like many young people of today, I was raised by a single parent. As such, my mother did not have enough money to buy a house, so we lived in rented apartments and houses.

Like most rental places, the ones I grew up living in were located “in cities.” The towns and cities I lived in as a child were located in the northeastern part of the U.S.A. and many of the buildings around us were so close together that a person could literally reach out the window and touch hands with a neighbor that was also reaching out their window.

Due to many of the experiences life throws at a person, once I became old enough to drive, I knew that I wanted to get out of the city and experience a more peaceful and quiet type of existence. However, I also knew that would take a certain amount of money, so I ended up getting a job driving a semi-truck from coast to coast.

That job allowed me to be alone, earn a descent wage, have a safe bed to sleep in every night and allow me to see and experience the entire country, all wrapped up in one package.

After spending years living out of a truck and saving my money, I finally found what I “thought” would be the perfect location to “BUILD” my own home.

The location was perfect for my wants and needs. I can lay outside at night and enjoy the silence as I would gaze up at the stars, without any city lights or other distractions taking away the beauty of the night time light shows.

The morning view is also breathtaking as I can look out the window of my sunroom and see nothing but the beauty of nature with it’s grasses waving in the breeze and the trees off in the distance that have become my calendar to show me what season it is by the color and size of their leaves.

I am a lucky man, because I am able to enjoy the fruits of my labor. I don’t just live in a building. I CREATED a home. I designed it. I picked out the materials I wanted to use in it’s creation. I paid for it.

I even worked the land by building multiple ponds and stocked them with various types of game fish, as well as planting fruit trees, a garden for vegetables and even flower beds.

In creating those ponds, I also created watering holes for ducks and geese as they fly over my property each year, as well as attracting deer, turkeys, turtles, heron and other types of wildlife on a regular basis, that put on a great show and education for me as well as my wife, children and grandchildren.

This is not just a home. It is a creation. It is a dream come true. It is my baby and a major part of my life. But my dream home and my lifelong creation is about to come to an end.

Over the decades, other homes have also been built within the view of my property and I appreciate having neighbors and the added security, but now I am faced with a new neighbor that I am not real happy about.

When corrupt or uninformed politicians allow greedy industrial solar developers to come into what is zoned as a farming and residential neighborhoods and destroy our property values, cause erosion that will flood my property and kill my fish, install products that have a history of creating fires and contain toxic hazardous chemicals that can be contaminate the ground water, fence off my property on all four sides, thus blocking off wildlife from my watering holes, install security lights all the way around my home, cause me to pay for these fake green energy projects that cause more contamination then other energy sources by using my tax money and raising my electric rates to help pay for the new high transmission lines, I would say that in my mind, I have every right to be upset by the betrayal of my elected officials on a local, state and federal level.
Thursday 23 July 2020
23 Jul 2020 Posted by SR Editor Comments: 0 Views: 
hackers.jpeg.jpg
Security Flaws In Solar Panels Discovered
A Quick Question: To any country that wants to run ALL of their energy using solar power. What will you do the next time there is a solar eclipse if there is no back up power system?

Here is another reason NOT to install Solar Farms near residential neighborhoods.

In May of 2019 the First US Cyber Attack Against a Solar and Wind Energy Company took place in Utah.

It turns out that some components used to monitor and control the systems, including converting the electricity over from DC voltage to AC voltage, can be controlled via the Internet.

In this day and age, all of us know about computer viruses and some of us even have a bit of knowledge concerning hacking and Botnets.

Well, it turns out that in California, there have been solar panels installed that contained “open WIFI access points” found on the Management Units (MMU), allowing anyone within range to connect to the network.

Other problems that were discovered involved access that would allow individuals to “ make configuration changes that would alter maximum tolerances and limits, or even shut down systems.

Could some of those changes potentially cause the system to overheat and cause a short and even a fire?

In another case, a researcher from Germany found 21 security flaws in solar power systems. Some of them were within the power inverters that feed the local energy into the national grid. These flaws could also be exploited by accessing an internet facing inverter from the other side of the world allowing someone to control the amount of energy going through an electric grid and even shutting it down.

In 2006, a 5 gigawatt shortage in Germany caused left then 10 million people in the dark across Europe, including Paris and Madrid having to spend hours without power.

These current security flaws could cause a 17 gigawatt shortage if hackers take controal of a large number of inverters and switch them off simultaneously.

If you have any information relating to other solar or wind sites discovering security flaws, please share that information with our group.
 None
Wednesday 08 July 2020
michael-Shellenberger2.jpg
Leading Green Activist Former Time Magazine Hero's of the Environment Claims public was misled
Green Activist Cried Wolf About Climate Change

A former leading green campaigner, Michael Shellenberger, previously one of Time magazine’s ‘Heroes of the Environment’ says he “cried wolf” on climate change, and wants to apologise for how environmentalists “misled the public”.

Michael Shellenberger is an American author, environmental policy writer, cofounder of Breakthrough Institute and founder of Environmental Progress. He was named a Time magazine Heroes of the Environment, winner of the 2008 Green Book Award

Writing in The Australian, Michael Shellenberger said that “on behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologise for the climate scare we created over the past 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.”

He points out that he has been a climate activist for twenty years, and an environmentalist for 30. But now, in a blunt and hard-hitting article he tackles some of the most hallowed tenets of the climate movement.

Shellenberger claims that humans are “not causing a ‘sixth mass extinction'”, the world is producing 25% more food than we need, carbon emissions are in decline, and that fires have “declined 25% around the world since 2003”. ]

He argues that this will sound like “climate denialism” to many people – but says “that just shows the power of climate alarmism”.

“In reality, the above facts come from the best-available scientific studies, including those ­conducted by or accepted by the IPCC, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, the Inter­national Union for the Conservation of Nature and other leading scientific bodies,” he writes in The Australian.

He is at pains to point out that he is no “right-wing anti-environmentalist”, saying he first became an environmentalist at 16 and has worked to protect the planet and indiginous people for decades.

“But until last year, I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare. Partly that’s because I was embarrassed. After all, I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist. For years, I ­referred to climate change as an “existential” threat to human civilisation, and called it a ‘crisis’,” he wrote.

“But mostly I was scared. I remained quiet about the climate disinformation campaign because I was afraid of losing friends and funding. The few times I summoned the courage to defend climate science from those who misrepresent it I suffered harsh consequences. And so I mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public.”

He writes that he watched “people in the White House and many in the media tried to destroy the reputation and career of an outstanding scientist, good man, and friend of mine, Roger Pielke Jr, a lifelong progressive Democrat and environmentalist who testified in favour of carbon regulations. Why did they do that? Because his ­research proves natural disasters aren’t getting worse.”

Here is additional information from Michael Shellenberger's Statement.

Sorry But I Cried Wolf On Climate Change

On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologise for the climate scare we created over the past 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.

I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.

But as an energy expert asked by the US congress to provide ­objective testimony, and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to serve as a reviewer of its next assessment report, I feel an obligation to apologise for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.

Here are some facts few people know:

• Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
• The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
• Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
• Fires have declined 25 per cent around the world since 2003
• The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska
• The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California
• Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany and France since the mid-1970s
• The Netherlands became rich, not poor, while adapting to life below sea level
• We produce 25 per cent more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
• Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change
• Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels, and
• Preventing future pandemics requires more, not less, “industrial” agriculture.

I know the above facts will sound like “climate denialism” to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism. In reality, the above facts come from the best-available scientific studies, including those ­conducted by or accepted by the IPCC, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, the Inter­national Union for the Conservation of Nature and other leading scientific bodies.

Some people will, when they read this, imagine that I’m some right-wing anti-environmentalist. I’m not. At 17, I lived in Nicaragua to show solidarity with the Sandinista socialist revolution. At 23 I raised money for Guatemalan women’s co-operatives. In my early 20s I lived in the semi-Amazon doing research with small farmers fighting land invasions. At 26 I helped expose poor conditions at Nike factories in Asia.

Green beginnings

I became an environmentalist at 16 when I threw a fundraiser for Rainforest Action Network. At 27 I helped save the last unprotected ancient redwoods in California. In my 30s I advocated renewables and successfully helped persuade the Obama administration to ­invest $US90bn into them. Over the past few years I helped save enough nuclear plants from being replaced by fossil fuels to prevent a sharp increase in emissions.

But until last year, I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare. Partly that’s because I was embarrassed. After all, I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist. For years, I ­referred to climate change as an “existential” threat to human civilisation, and called it a “crisis”.

But mostly I was scared. I remained quiet about the climate disinformation campaign because I was afraid of losing friends and funding. The few times I summoned the courage to defend climate science from those who misrepresent it I suffered harsh consequences. And so I mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public.

I even stood by as people in the White House and many in the media tried to destroy the reputation and career of an outstanding scientist, good man, and friend of mine, Roger Pielke Jr, a lifelong progressive Democrat and environmentalist who testified in favour of carbon regulations. Why did they do that? Because his ­research proves natural disasters aren’t getting worse. But then, last year, things spiralled out of control. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said: “The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” Britain’s most high-profile environmental group claimed “climate change kills children”.
Turning point

The world’s most influential green journalist, Bill McKibben, called climate change the “greatest challenge humans have ever faced” and said it would “wipe out civilisations”. Mainstream journalists ­reported, repeatedly, that the Amazon was “the lungs of the world”, and that deforestation was like a ­nuclear bomb going off.
As a result, half of the people surveyed around the world last year said they thought climate change would make humanity ­extinct. And in January, one out of five British children told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change.

Whether or not you have children you must see how wrong this is. I admit I may be sensitive because I have a teenage daughter. After we talked about the science she was reassured. But her friends are deeply misinformed and thus, understandably, frightened.

I thus decided I had to speak out. I knew that writing a few articles wouldn’t be enough. I needed a book to properly lay out all of the evidence. And so my formal ­apology for our fearmongering comes in the form of my new book, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All.

Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany and France since the mid-1970s.

It is based on two decades of research and three decades of environmental activism. At 400 pages, with 100 of them endnotes, Apocalypse Never covers climate change, deforestation, plastic waste, species extinction, industrialisation, meat, nuclear energy, and renewables.

Some highlights from the book:
• Factories and modern farming are the keys to human liberation and environmental progress
• The most important thing for saving the environment is producing more food, particularly meat, on less land
• The most important thing for reducing pollution and emissions is moving from wood to coal to petrol to natural gas to uranium
• 100 per cent renewables would require increasing the land used for energy from today’s 0.5 per cent to 50 per cent
• We should want cities, farms, and power plants to have higher, not lower, power densities
• Vegetarianism reduces one’s emissions by less than 4 per cent
• Greenpeace didn’t save the whales — switching from whale oil to petroleum and palm oil did
• “Free-range” beef would require 20 times more land and produce 300 per cent more emissions
• Greenpeace dogmatism worsened forest fragmentation of the Amazon, and
• The colonialist approach to gorilla conservation in the Congo produced a backlash that may have resulted in the killing of 250 elephants.

Why were we all so misled? In the final three chapters of Apocalypse Never I expose the ­financial, political and ideological motivations. Environmental groups have accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests. Groups motivated by anti-humanist beliefs forced the World Bank to stop trying to end poverty and instead make poverty “sustainable”. And status anxiety, depression and hostility to modern civilisation are behind much of the alarmism.

Reality bites


Once you realise just how badly misinformed we have been, often by people with plainly unsavoury motivations, it is hard not to feel duped. Will Apocalypse Never make any difference? There are certainly reasons to doubt it. The news media have been making apocalyptic pronouncements about climate change since the late 1980s, and do not seem disposed to stop. The ideology behind environmental alarmism — Malthusianism — has been repeatedly debunked for 200 years and yet is more powerful than ever.

But there are also reasons to ­believe that environmental alarmism will, if not come to an end, have diminishing cultural power.

A real crisis

The coronavirus pandemic is an actual crisis that puts the climate “crisis” into perspective. Even if you think we have overreacted, COVID-19 has killed nearly 500,000 people and shattered economies around the globe.
Scientific institutions including WHO and IPCC have undermined their credibility through the repeated politicisation of science. Their future existence and relevance depends on new leadership and serious reform. Facts still matter, and social media is allowing for a wider range of new and independent voices to outcompete alarmist environmental journalists at legacy publications.

Nations are reverting openly to self-interest and away from Malthusianism and neoliberalism, which is good for nuclear and bad for renewables.

The evidence is overwhelming that our high-energy civilisation is better for people and nature than the low-energy civilisation that climate alarmists would return us to.

The invitations from IPCC and congress are signs of a growing openness to new thinking about climate change and the environment. Another one has been to the response to my book from climate scientists, conservationists and ­environmental scholars. “Apocalypse Never is an extremely ­important book,” writes Richard Rhodes, the Pulitzer-winning ­author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb. “This may be the most important book on the environment ever written,” says one of the fathers of modern climate science, Tom Wigley.

“We environmentalists condemn those with antithetical views of being ignorant of science and susceptible to confirmation bias,” wrote the former head of The Nature Conservancy, Steve McCormick. “But too often we are guilty of the same. Shellenberger offers ‘tough love’: a challenge to entrenched orthodoxies and rigid, self-defeating mindsets. Apocalypse Never serves up occasionally stinging, but always well-crafted, evidence-based points of view that will help develop the ‘mental muscle’ we need to envision and design not only a hopeful, but an attainable, future.”

That is all I hoped for in writing it. If you’ve made it this far, I hope you’ll agree it’s perhaps not as strange as it seems that a lifelong environmentalist and progressive felt the need to speak out against the alarmism. I further hope that you’ll accept my apology.
 None
Sunday 05 April 2020
05 Apr 2020 Posted by SR Editor Comments: 0 Views: 
closed-solar-panels.jpg
solar farms waste money energy lost unreliable
The firm behind a large solar farm in the UK announced that large sites in the countryside like theirs, are an inefficient way of creating electricity.
According to the company, around two thirds of the energy created by one of their large sites is lost when it is transported.
A Television station in the UK interviewed Tim Dobson from Switch 2 Renewable, a solar company and he claimed, the networks can’t rely on renewable energy that goes up and down.

He also claimed that between 4 o’clock and 7 o’clock, when they really need capacity, they rely on other sources.
So, if a major portion of the solar energy is lost when it is transported and it is not reliable during peak times, this raises the question as to WHY so many governments are spending tax payer money supporting grants and giving money to solar developers.
Keep in mind, it is the developer that gets the money from the Government, then many times they will sell the solar farms to another company and many times that will be a company from China.

Since no business can sustain operating at a financial loss for an extended period of time, someone needs to find out WHY these farms are being built, if they will not last for an extended time, if it cost more to build them then they are worth and who is really profiting from having them built all over the world?

Is having solar energy really more important then having food? I ask this because it is impossible to have food and solar power plants on the same area of land. We know we need food, but there are alternatives to throwing money away on solar farms.
Sunday 22 March 2020
22 Mar 2020 Posted by SR Editor Comments: 0 Views: 
cows_dead.jpg
French farmers say wind turbines and solar panels have killed hundreds of their cows
French farmers say wind turbines and solar panels have killed hundreds of their cows.

Cows are being killed by electricity travelling through the ground, farmers claim
French farmer says hundreds of cows being killed by solar panels and wind turbines
Cattle in Brittany began losing weight and eventually died so land was tested
Electrical current was said to be found coming thought the earth and the water

Read the entire story at: Hundreds of Dead Cows