Gasoline has a much higher watt-density than sunlight, which is why they're using a gas generator here, instead of solar panels.  A picture is worth a thousand words.

The problem should be obvious to anyone, and funny too, if only it wasn't so sad.

Every day we see more property rights slip sliding away, and it's clear that this has become a systematic abuse of civil rights.  Consider that "Just as slavery was an abomination to natural rights, the seizure of personal property for “public benefit” is an affront to America’s founding principles.  Frederick Douglass who was born a slave believed that he owned himself and his labor.  When the state takes the fruits of our labor without our consent, either through taxes or diminished property rights, they are taking part of our life that we will never get back.  Conceptually, there is very little to distinguish this from slavery."   [Attorney and author Timothy Sandefur explains this in great detail in his book, "Cornerstone of Liberty, Property Rights in 21st Century America."]

Here are two important cases that you should know about and follow - one right here in Whatcom County, and another nearby in Idaho - both fought by the Pacific Legal Foundation.   In both cases, extreme regulation related to bogus "science" has destroyed folks' lives.   Government is supposed to protect our rights, not trash them like this.

If government blocks access to your land, it has committed a taking  -- Dunlap v. City of Nooksack

Pacific Legal Foundation
Contact: Brian T. Hodges

Status: Victory! Favorable decision issued October 25, 2010. Motion to publish the opinion denied on December, 2010.

Summary:  Kipp and Marilyn Dunlap bought a small vacant residential lot in Nooksack, Washington with the dream of building a home there. But the city had other ideas.

Nooksack slough runs through the middle of the Dunlaps' lot, and the city declared that land adjacent to the stream an environmentally sensitive area. The city imposed mandatory buffers on both sides of the stream, making their property off limits to development without a variance. And the city stated that the only way it would consider granting the Dunlaps a variance would be if they redesigned their home to be triangular in shape, raised on stilts, and have a floor area no more than 480 square feet. The city would not allow the Dunlaps to put in a yard, garden, or even a fence.   (more)


YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK
EPA to property owner: 'Your land is our land'
$40 million in fines pending over plan to build new home

World Net Daily
September 23, 2011
by Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND

Just imagine. You want to build a home, so you buy a $23,000 piece of land in a residential subdivision in your hometown and get started. The government then tells you to stop, threatens you with $40 million in fines and is not kidding.

That's the case now before the U.S. Supreme Court, with briefs being filed today by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of a Priest Lake, Idaho, family, Chantell and Mike Sackett.

Attorney Damien Schiff, who will be arguing before the high court in the case, said it's simply a case of a government run amok, and it poses a potential threat to perhaps not every landowner across the nation, but untold millions.

"Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws"

The Sacketts, Schiff said, "bought property, and the government in effect has ordered them to treat the property like a public park."

"The EPA has not paid them a dime for that privilege," he said. "The regime we have operating now allows the EPA to take property without having to pay for it, or giving the owners the right to their day in court."" 

The organization has prepared a video to explain the case.   (more)

This struggle to hold on to our civil rights is far from over.   If anything, the danger grows greater every day.   It will be devastating if Whatcom County "opts-in" to the Ruckelshaus Process or if the "natural resources marketplace" rears its ugly head through actions like this ticking bomb that was just approved by County Council 7-0 on September 13, 2011.   What's wrong with that?   Read it again closely - real closely -- and you'll see it talks about securing “predictable water supplies and sustainable natural resources.”   Who's going to do this "securing"?   By whom, and how?    Watch out Whatcom!

In a response to a request from former House Science, Space and Technology Committee Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN), the Government Accountability Office (GAO) commissioned a report to evaluate the cost, effectiveness and adverse consequences of climate engineering technologies, also referred to as geoengineering. The report concluded that climate engineering technologies do not now offer a viable response to global climate change.

The technologies being proposed have been categorized as carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation management (SRM). CDR would reduce the atmospheric concentration of CO2, allowing more heat to escape and thus cooling the Earth. For example, proposed CDR technologies include enhancing the uptake of CO2 in oceans and forests and capturing CO2 from air chemically for storage underground. SRM technologies would place reflective material in space or in Earth's atmosphere to scatter or reflect sunlight (for example, by injecting sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere to scatter incoming solar radiation or brightening clouds) or would increase the planet's reflectivity (for example, by painting roofs and pavements in light colors).

The GAO report examined a range of proposed geoengineering fixes to determine their “technological readiness” on a scale of one to nine. Direct air capture of carbon dioxide scored the highest at three. No solar resource management approach scored above two.

GAO found these technologies currently immature, many with potentially negative consequences. Some studies say, for example, that stratospheric aerosols might greatly reduce summer precipitation in places such as India and northern China. Many experts advocated research because of its potential benefits but also recognized its risks. For example, a country might unilaterally deploy a technology with a transboundary effect.
 
Highlights of the study may be read here, and the entire 135-page report is available at this site.

The Bellingham City Hall passed a ban on plastic shopping bags based on fraudulent data that they were all too willing to believe. You know, like those emails that get forwarded all over the internet, that seem to say exactly what you want to believe, but when you “snopes” it, none of it is actually true? Well, we now have public policy based on data that was never “snopesed”. Even the EPA published a report saying that plastic shopping bags are not a significant contributor to the nation’s litter stream.

Do you think the city will reverse its ban? That isn’t likely. Once you lose liberty, it is very unlikely that you will ever reclaim it. After all, the bag ban still appeals to environmental extremists, who will squall like hammered cats if anyone attempts to repeal the ordinance. That just would not sit well with the illiberal control freaks.

After all, what’s so bad about a silly little bag ban? It’s just a minor inconvenience, and we can all feel good about how well we project the illusion of green-hood. Except, well, an entire industry (along with its jobs) is likely to disappear. Our liberty cannot withstand death by a thousand cuts. Today, it’s a minor inconvenience, eventually it’s oppression. And more’s the pity when it’s based on a fraud.

UPDATE  9/14/11:    Bad news folks.   The people lost this one.  Whatcom County Council went along with this, in a 7-0 vote.  Big win for eco-activism.   Hello more federal oversight.  Dominoes will fall now around the Bay and through the islands, one by one.   Mark our words.

People, it looks like this is your last chance to speak up on Whatcom County's proposed resolution that would add three points of land -- Chuckanut Rock, Lummi Rocks, and Carter Point of Lummi Island -- to the Bureau of Land Management's inventory of "national conservation areas."   On September 9th, this resolution was held for further consideration by the "natural resources committee" -- but that's comprised of Sam Crawford, Bill Knutzen and Carl Weimer.   Since Crawford the one who proposed this in the first place, who thinks it won't be rubber-stamped without question?   Let's hope there are at least a few questions.   This will have lasting significance.

What's wrong with doing this?   Check out our original post.   Most folks agree, even on council, that there's little about those two rock features or Carter Point that particularly rises to "national significance."   But chatter around local campfires says that local eco activists are HOT to see them added to the federal bill that Cantwell, Murray and Larsen have been cobbling up, along with BLM Director Ken Salazar at the behest of the White House.

The worst part of this county resolution - read it yourself here -- is that it sets a very low bar and sets a bad precedent by bestowing ecological signifcance to properties without any real scientific basis.   This says all three are "ecologically important sites" in these ways:

     Lummi Rocks and Carter Point - because they're located in close proximity to another place - the DNR Lummi Island Natural Resource Conservation Area.   Close proximity makes these important?   That's pretty thin, but this will "make it so" officially.
     Chuckanut Rock -- because it's located in Chuckanut Bay? "...a high value scenic, recreational, and ecological area..." with conservation easements?     That's enough to qualify as a nationally recognized place, also with ecological significance?

This resolution also blesses everything else Salazar plans for the San Juans.   Real slam dunk for eco activism.   After this passes, whatever's near these will become "signficant" too?    People, this is a rolling "ecology" domino table.   Watch out Whatcom!

It's not too late to write, call, or show up.   The committee hearing is at 9:30 in council chambers, and this is already on the evening agenda for final passage.   The full day's agenda is here.  Maybe there's a free trip to Washington D.C. in it for local proponents who "ink" the deal.   Nothing would surprise us, at this point.

Great news, folks!   Rosa Koire, the founder and board member of the Post Sustainability Institute (and also a founding member of "Democrats Against Agenda 21") will be speaking on Thursday September 29, 2011 in Friday Harbor.

This is a really special opportunity to hear one of the most knowledgeable people around on the subject, and according to the flyer seating will be limited.   Call (360) 378-8418 to RSVP.   Check out the flyer and go if you can.   Yes, you have to take the ferry from Anacortes, and it'll make for a late night, but well worth the trip.

Everyone who cares about property rights - holding on to their civil rights -- has got to wake up and understand the dark, oppressive side of "sustainability" and "communityship."