Bill O'Reilly Makes a Fool of Himself on His Own Show

Recently, on his show The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly was speaking with a guest about solar power. When his guest asked him what he was willing to do to save the planet, Bill responded with a confusing rant:

“Here’s what I’m willing to,” O’Reilly said. “I’d like to put solar panels on my house. And heat my house through the sun. I would like to do that for a reasonable amount of money. I don’t want to buy the oil every month. They can’t do it for a reasonable amount of money, number one.

“And its so complicated ... I can’t do it. ... So don’t tell me about my grandchildren. If they can figure out the solar panels, they can have them. But it’s all bunk. It’s all bull at this point for a guy like me. ...I want a clean planet. But I’d like the stuff to work.”

View the clip here. He starts his blubbering about 3:23 into this clip.

So, according to Bill, solar is too complicated and too expensive. Well, I guess Bill isn't very good at using the Internet, because if he were, he could learn that putting solar panels on the roof of his house does not have to be complicated or expensive. See the post below about Solar City. There are several companies out there willing to make solar a simple, affordable option, even for you Bill. Do a quick Google search and find out. You might be surprised.

SolarCity makes solar an affordable option for homeowners

The SolarCity Solar Lease program gives homeowners a way to save 15 percent on their monthly power bill with no upfront costs. Imagine that! You can have solar panels installed on your roof at no cost to you, your monthly power bill goes down and now you're producing a large portion of your home's energy needs. Seems like a no-brainer. And the best part is that as electricity costs rise in the future, your savings will increase. This is because with Solar Lease you can lock in a lower electricity rates for the term of your lease. More information can be found on the SolarCity website.

This system (often called a Power Purchase Agreement, or PPA) is growing in popularity, especially in states like California, Arizona and Oregon, where electricity costs and government incentives are high. Other companies that offer PPAs include Tioga Energy and SunRun. As electricity costs continue to rise in other states, there is no doubt that PPAs will become even more common across the country.

Email from Ron Jones at Green Builder Magazine

I received this email message from Ron Jones at Green Builder Magazine recently and I thought it was great. I couldn't find a link for it, so I copied and pasted it here. The message is spot on with my own thoughts and feelings about the climate change debate. Enjoy!

Ditch the Climate Change Debate

A recent editorial cartoon that I ran across cleverly expressed a great deal of my own thoughts around the climate change debate. The cartoonist (Joel Pett, Lexington Herald-Leader) depicts an obviously unconvinced audience member at a presentation where benefits of clean energy are being displayed on the stage screen. The attendee is shown demanding an answer to a question similar to the following:

"What if it turns out that climate change is all a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"

The presenter he is questioning has a list of goals on the screen including:
• Energy Independence
• Preserve Rainforests
• Sustainability
• Green Jobs
• Livable Cities
• Renewables
• Clean Water, Air
• Healthy Children

In a single frame, and with surgical irony, the cartoonist has masterfully steered us to the question I have been asking myself and others for a long time, which is essentially, why are we not able to shift the dialog onto a productive level that leaves the polarization and bickering behind so we can just get started on the enormous task of cleaning up the mess we've been helping to make?

We don't have to reach some final, indisputable conclusion on the "climate" debate to know that there are plenty of good reasons to take steps to replace 18th and 19th century technologies and the polluting energy sources that have been fueling them.

The answer must reside somewhere deep in human nature. There seems to be an irresistible force of passion that makes us dig in our heels and refuse to budge when we feel strongly about something. In this case, it doesn't really matter if we're talking about those who view "climate change" or "global warming," as some prefer to refer to it, as the great challenge of our time or those who are absolutely convinced that it is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.

It seems that those who have taken a passionate stand either way are prepared to fight over this for as long as takes, and unfortunately, the fact that people in both camps seem determined to drive to an "all or nothing" resolution keeps getting in the way of potential progress on the things we could agree on.

Even the most hardcore climate skeptics don't try to make their case by denying or stating opposition to goals like those listed by the cartoonist, they just refuse to go there. At the same time, their counterparts, who are every bit as passionate in their insistence that mankind's activities are at the center of all the problems in the world, often appear to be pushing for absolute and immediate solutions with little or no willingness to explore common ground. The net result is an ongoing bitter conflict that is often stalled by distractions leaving those of us in the middle stranded and feeling like we can't do anything meaningful to influence the outcome.

I am personally convinced that we are indeed witnessing measurable levels of global climate change. I only make this statement based on personal observation and certainly not because I believe the reports of governments, including our own, or the findings of scientists I have never met. I have reached my conclusion because I have observed certain evidence with my own eyes. I've visited glaciers from Alaska to New Zealand that are receding at unprecedented and alarming rates. I have flown over millions of acres of America's western forests and seen the beetle kill that is resulting from milder winter temperatures to the detriment of not only the trees, but also virtually every species in that ecosystem.

What I have no way of verifying on my own is how much of this shift is attributable to the activities of the human species. I seriously doubt that it is the primary factor. Both sides of this debate agree that the scale and complexity of the Earth's atmosphere and its global climate have seen numerous dramatic shifts to one extreme or the other over time.

What I do know is that I have seen the contrast between the air in Beijing and other cities in the Northern Hemisphere with that of still pristine regions of the South Pacific. The calamity is there for anyone who is interested to see. I have also fished a variety of streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs throughout North America where the fish populations face collapse from human-caused pollution and where signs are posted to warn against consuming the fish that are there.

Put simply, we have used our one and only planetary home and all of its natural systems as a garbage dump of one kind or another for practically all of recorded human history. Sadly, the situation has only worsened over the last few centuries as we made industrial "advances" and as human population has swelled. We have treated it like a trash can and no matter how big the can is, it can only hold so much. We are reaching that point and before it's too late we need to revise our practices. It's time to clean up our act and "create a better world"—whether global warming is a hoax or not.

Why This Blog?

The purpose of this blog is to provide me with an outlet to express my own personal opinion regarding green issues. If it is biased by anything, it is by my own personal thoughts and viewpoints. Politically, I am middle of the road, more of an independent than anything else. I like to see things from both sides before forming an opinion. Over the past couple of years, I have listened to fight over global warming and climate change. I have tried to listen carefully and unbiasedly to both sides of the debate as I have formed my opinion on the matter.

As with all politics, the waves of extremism from both sides frustrate me and are a huge turn-off. I don't like listening to people who won't take the time to consider a contrary point of view or even listen to the other side of a debate. I much prefer compromise -- being willing to meet in the middle and move things forward. To me, compromise is the essence of progress.

So, when it comes to climate change, I have had to ask myself which side, if any, would lead to the most good. What if I decided not to believe in climate change, and then climate change is discovered to be true? Or conversely, what if I decided to believe in climate change, and then climate change is discovered to be false? Which position would lead to most harm, or the most good?

After thinking about the issue for some time, I have come to this conclusion: What harm is there in accepting that climate change exists and taking steps to limit or stop it? Sure, it will require that we change the way we do things. It will require new laws and regulations, as well as new advances in technology. It will require us to rethink the way we live and work. But, I only see good coming from this. I see less pollution, less dependence on antiquated technologies, less dependence on foreign oil, more energy independence, more opportunities for innovation and, in the end, more progress.

So, what if we accept that climate change exists, take steps to stop it and then find out that it was all a hoax? Well, then we can look back and see that at the very least, we've helped improve air and water quality, we've reduced our dependence on fossil fuels, we've become more energy independent both as a nation and as individuals, and we've left the planet better for our children. How could this be a bad thing?

On the contrary, if we decide to take the opposite approach -- believing that climate change is not happening and continuing with the status quo, and then later down the road find out that climate change did indeed exist, where does that leave us? It leaves us with a planet that is even harder to fix than before. It leaves us with more pollution, less natural resources and a much bigger problem for our children.

I have decided that the safest approach is to believe that climate change is happening and that it is caused by humans. I believe that this being the case, we should take steps to reduce the amount of CO2 we put into the air and invest in technologies that will enable us to lead cleaner, more responsible and less polluting lives. The changes that need to happen won't happen over night and they won't happen without compromise. Both sides will need to make some concessions. Both sides need to be reasonable, REASONABLY GREEN.