This short chapter on the suppression of alternative energy was ultimately not included in the published edition of Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Cover-Ups in American Politics. It is included here for interested readers.
The use of solar energy has not been opened up because the oil industry does not own the sun.
– Ralph Nader, Loose Talk
When I was a child, I enjoyed thinking about the future, and especially loved to imagine flying around in one of those cool bubble cars I’d seen on The Jetsons cartoons. Here we are, fifty years later, and we have the same gas and oil guzzling motor vehicles, the same basic planes, the same trains, the same utility companies to monitor and charge for our electricity, gas and water usage. Jimmy Carter talked a lot about new sources of energy back in the 1970s. So did some of the hippies. And yet, decades later, there has been absolutely no progression on this front.
In the late 1970s, Joseph Newman invented an energy machine, which he claimed could power automobiles and provide energy to homes at virtually no cost. To no one’s surprise, Newman was denied a patent by the U.S. Patent Office in 1979. Newman held many public demonstrations of his device, which drew large and enthusiastic crowds, and no one could find any chicanery on his part. However, because his machine violated the known laws of science, his potentially groundbreaking invention has been suppressed. Newman is still active, and has a loyal following, but clearly powerful forces would be adversely affected by the widespread implementation of a device like his. According to a study by Climate Progress, in the first quarter of 2011 alone, the four major oil companies made over $18 billion in profits, an astounding 40 percent increase over their massive profits from the previous year. Included in this figure was $5.5 billion for BP, which had supposedly incurred heavy expenses in cleaning up the Gulf Oil spill. In addition to their huge profits, Big Oil also receives some $4 billion in annual tax subsidies. Is it realistic to expect the plutocrats who rape the public in such a fashion to give everything up for the benefit of humanity?
Stanley Meyer invented a water fuel cell, and demonstrated his device by driving a dune buggy type vehicle from Los Angeles to New York on only 22 gallons of water. Local news covered the story, and one can still see their reports on you tube. Needless to say, the oil companies would object strenuously to a device that would eliminate the need for gas and oil in vehicles entirely. Mayer died suddenly, in the best conspiratorial tradition, on March 21, 1998. The Franklin County, Ohio coroner attributed his death to an aneurism, but some were more skeptical, and bold enough to think perhaps he’d become yet another casualty of the powers that be. Predictably, his car and all of his equipment were stolen within a week of his death, according to his twin brother Steve. Naturally, Stan Meyer had described being threatened by the oil companies. Here is an incredible excerpt from the official coroner’s report: “Decedent supposedly at lunch with N.A.T.O. officials at a Cracker Barrel diner. The group made an opening toast with cranberry juice, immediately after which, decedent ran outside followed by his brother, then vomited violently and told his brother that he had been poisoned.”
Alternative energy champion Eugene Mallove wrote about Mayer’s death and of his belief there were conspirators aligned against him. Thus it was more than a little ironic that Mallove himself met an unnatural death. On May 14, 2004, Mallove was murdered while cleaning a property owned by his parents. No one has been convicted of the crime. No, you are not reading fiction.
Thanks to the incredible greed of the oil companies and gutless politicians, the very modest gains in fuel efficiency realized during the Carter presidency have eroded away, so that we are basically back to where we were when he was elected. Hybrid vehicles and electric cars are useless to the vast majority of Americans, who can’t begin to afford them.
Hollywood celebrities are big on lecturing the unwashed masses about “conserving” energy and not “wasting” precious resources. To say that they are hypocritical on this issue is to understate things severely. Actor John Travolta, like nearly all celebrities, likes to warn Americans about “global warming” and advising that “we have to think about alternative methods of fuel.” However, his concerns about the environment haven’t stopped him from owning five private planes. As noted by author Jason Mattera, in his book Hollywood Hypocrites, “environmentally conscious” actor Harrison Ford actually has seven private jets. Ford has flippantly declared, “I often fly up the coast for a cheeseburger.” Also detailed by Mattera is the fact that rock stars Bruce Springsteen and Jon Bon Jovi both claim to be “farmers” in order to take advantage of a New Jersey law permitting those who farm to avoid paying 98 percent of property taxes. Celebrities are forever railing about the “rich paying their fair share,” but again we see that they simply don’t do so themselves.
Self righteous “rock star” Sting pretends to be one of the most “environmentally conscious” public figures in the world. Sting owns seven homes and, in the words of his wife, “has a 750-person crew to bring around the world, it is a difficult challenge.” While actors Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are overtly “concerned” about “global warming,” they are supremely addicted to private jet travel. They take dozens of private flights around the world every year. Barbra Streisand lectures the common riff raff about making “simple, conscious decisions” in their everyday lives in order to conserve resources. Things like not running a dishwasher unless it’s full, for instance. In real life, Streisand is one of the most overbearing and spoiled divas imaginable. Her contract stipulations for such things as a new toilet seat wherever she stays, a production office stocked with “120 bath sized towels immediately upon arrival” and the typical affinity for private air travel makes her public assertions laughable. The always pretentious Madonna was rightfully derided, along with all the other participants in a recent “Live Earth” concert, by Matt Bellamy of the band Muse, for participating in what he called “private jets for climate change.” Not only does Madonna never practice what she preaches, she even owns considerable investments in oil exploration, mining and other environmentally unfriendly projects.
Former Beatle “Sir” Paul McCartney (you know John Lennon would be repulsed by such a title) had his new Lexus hybrid flown to him by private jet. It doesn’t get much more ridiculous than that. By the way, the Lexus was almost certainly given to the super rich celebrity, who’d done some promotional work for them. Actress Jennifer Anniston made the preposterous claim that she restricted herself to a three minute shower, and brushed her teeth at the same time, in order to conserve water. In April, 2007, singer Sheryl Crow made a huge production about only using one sheet of toilet paper per bathroom visit, and urged others to follow her lead. If you go to Smoking Gun’s website, you’ll see that Crow’s routine demands are hardly the stuff of a “down to earth” person. Crow was accompanied on a cross country college speaking tour by Inconvenient Truth (Al Gore’s documentary film which was predictably given two Academy Awards) producer and fellow private jet aficionado Laurie David, to warn Americans about the dangers of global warming. Actor Woody Harrelson’s affinity for “vegan” clothing-whatever that could possibly be-was such that he had his favorite “vegan” belt and shoes flown to him at the Cannes Film Festival by private jet.
The tendency of celebrities to counsel the non-famous to “do as I say, not as I do” is on the same hypocritical wavelength as Prince Charles advising British commoners to “snub the bathtub” and take shorter showers, as part of his “Green” campaign Start. (Daily Mail UK, August 19, 2010). You can bet everything you own that neither Charles nor any other member of the antiquated Royal family is going to give up their baths for anyone or anything. Both the British Royals and our own Hollywood “royalty” appear to be addicted to “talking the talk,” but appear to almost never “walk the walk.”
Those who are the most publicly vocal about the intolerance of others are often the most intolerant of all. For instance, Steve Zwick, a conventional “environmentalist,” made the following “tolerant” suggestion, in Forbes (on April 19, 2012): “We know who the active denialists are – not the people who buy the lies, mind you, but the people who create the lies. Let’s start keeping track of them now, and when the famines come, let’s make them pay. Let’s let their houses burn. Let’s swap their safe land for submerged islands. Let’s force them to bear the cost of rising food prices.” The worst part about this is that Zwick and many of his fellow “environmentalists” would be aghast at the notion his sentiments were inappropriate. There is, at the very least, a great deal of reasonable doubt about the global warming thesis. Zwick’s proposed method of “debate” is typical of what passes for “liberalism” these days.
The point, once again, is that our leaders-whether they are unconscionable bankers or clueless celebrities- are not subject to the same rules they demand the rest of us adhere to.
I was born in 1956, and have lived in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area all my life. About twenty years ago, I began noticing a disturbing trend. The services we used to take for granted, that reflected our status as one of the wealthiest areas in the richest country on earth, have changed dramatically for the worst.
When I was a kid, in the 1960s, it never occurred to me that we might lose power for any extended period of time. That only happened during thunderstorms, and it was kind of exciting to light candles and play Monopoly or Scrabble for a few hours. The idea that the electricity would go out during a snowstorm would have been incomprehensible. Ice never worried us, and never caused any power outages, even though all the power lines were above ground back then. My much older sisters-who grew up in the 1940s-have told me things were much the same in that era.
Now, before any of the way too frequent “big” storm watches, snow, ice or otherwise, the mainstream media dutifully passes on the statements from local utility companies, that we must expect massive power outages, possibly lasting for days. With our advances in technology, and the fact many power lines now are below ground, how can we possibly accept a much lower quality of service than we were receiving as long as seventy years ago? A few years ago, during that violent thunderstorm that was subsequently termed a “derecho” (a word I’d never heard before), we lost power for four days. All our power lines are underground. This was a completely ridiculous, inexcusable situation, but I appear to be the only one complaining, or even noticing.
Even more inexplicable is the present tendency of large trees to come crashing down, on power wires or too often into homes, during thunderstorms, or even snow falls. I lived, until the age of nineteen, in a house that had 250 acres of thick woods behind it. There were numerous tall trees in our backyard. Never once, during those nineteen years, did I witness a single tree going down, due to lightning, heavy ice or snow, or wind. Was my experience out of the norm; just a fluky anomaly? Are modern day trees wimpier than they used to be? What is going on?
Then you have the snow removal services. In our area, this is VDOT (Virginia Department of Transportation). I have been ranting and raving about their woeful “performance” for years, but when I was young, and even well into the 1980s, someone cleared the streets much more quickly, thoroughly and efficiently. I’ve grown exasperated watching VDOT plow trucks sitting on the side of the road- often in groups of six or more-while motorists try to cope with that particular un-plowed road. And I’d be a millionaire if I had a dime for every time I’ve seen one of these vehicles driving along with their plows proudly up in the air, plowing nothing. Often these same non-plowing plow trucks are going well below the speed limit, so they are backing traffic up.
I’ve called VDOT, and sent them emails, but they don’t respond. Clearly, it is either their policy to tell their drivers to spend more time with their plows up, instead of actually plowing, or these drivers are sociopaths that enjoy irritating and inconveniencing the public. Either way, we’re not getting First World service any more, from the state agency our tax dollars finance for the purpose of clearing the roads in inclement weather, or the public utility companies we pay ever increasing rates to. And then there are the median strips, and other common areas that local governments are responsible for maintaining. They simply aren’t mowing the grass in those areas, or clearing out the weeds and brush, at anywhere near the level they used to. Thus, we are starting to take on the look of a Third World nation.
As is the case with all our tax dollars, we are paying more and more for less and less. We have more money than any country in the world; there is no excuse for this kind of woeful waste of resources. The question is; why do we accept this reduction of services? I understand that our power grids are pitifully out of date and in dire need of upgrading (and, of course, why weren’t they upgraded long ago?), but even so, we have a right to expect much, much better.