By circumventing Congress and unleashing the vast powers of the administrative regulatory state in the name of combating “climate change,” President Obama has – yet again – revealed his determination to subject the American people to the unchecked whims of the federal bureaucracy.
Obama’s “Climate Action Plan” has nothing to do with the climate. Instead, the climate, in all of its complexity, serves as a convenient pretext for the administration — working hand in glove with environmental groups and non-competitive, rent-seeking industries — to seize regulatory control of the production and use of energy so as to further concentrate power in Washington. Obama’s weapons of choice are executive orders and the regulatory power of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), both of which do not require the approval of elected officials in Congress nor those at the state and local level.
Addressing a crowd gathered at Washington’s elite Georgetown University (where the annual cost of tuition is north of $44,000 a year), Obama outlined his scheme to rid the world of “carbon pollution.” Among other things, it calls for a 17 percent reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions in the U.S. by 2020, more stringent efficiency standards for home appliances, tougher fuel mileage requirements for heavy-duty trucks, and more subsidies for already heavily subsidized and environmentally destructive (massive bird and bat kills) wind farms.
War on Coal
But it is the administration’s plans for power plants that will have the most far-reaching effect on consumers and businesses. In 2012, the Obama EPA issued its “new source performance standard” that effectively made it impossible to build new coal-fired power plants, because no technology exists that would enable utilities to meet the new standards. At the time, the head of EPA’s air office, Gina McCarthy, assured the public that existing plants would not have to meet the new standard and that EPA was not promoting fuel-switching. Less than a year after McCarthy’s solemn promise, however, the following sentence appears on page 19 of Obama’s Climate Action Plan: “Going forward, we will promote fuel-switching from coal to gas for electricity production and encourage the development for a global market for gas.”
The cat was let out of the bag when one of Obama’s science advisors, Daniel Shrag of Harvard, told the New York Times (June 25) that, “Politically, the White House is hesitant to say they are having a war on coal. On the other hand, a war on coal is exactly what is needed.” Coal, of which the United States has by far the largest reserves in the world, still account for 37 percent of the nation’s electricity. The administration’s war on coal amounts to nothing less than industrial sabotage by regulatory means. By eliminating affordable, abundant coal from the nation’s energy mix, the administration is deliberately taking a step that will lead to loss of good-paying jobs in the nation’s leading coal-producing states of Wyoming, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Alabama, Virginia, Utah, Montana, and North Dakota. No longer able to draw on rich coal reserves, utilities will have little choice but to charge more for the electricity they sell to their customers. Electricity rates will go up, hitting seniors and others living on lower incomes the hardest.
While natural gas extracted from America’s vast shale formations will be able to fill some of the gap, the elimination of coal as a power source will put huge strains on the already weak economy and on household budgets. And what is to keep the war on coal from morphing into a war on gas? While most Americans welcome the jobs and lower power rates the Shale Revolution has made possible, the Obama administration and its allies in the environmental movement remain firm in their hostility to fossil fuels. After coal has been regulated out of existence, green elites will not hesitate to go after natural gas and oil. EPA bureaucrats and Obama administration political appointees are already devising schemes to bring about federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking.
The Shale Revolution, and all the potential it holds for enabling American energy independence within a few decades, has unfolded without Washington’s heavy hand. To green elites inside and outside the administration, this is precisely the problem. They will not stand idly by and watch fossil fuels, in this case natural gas and shale oil, provide Americans with affordable energy.
Overseeing the implementation of Obama’s Climate Action Plan will be his designated EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. A fixture in EPA’s bureaucracy for many years, McCarthy is highly skilled at drafting regulations that bypass Congress and impose extraordinary burdens on the lives of ordinary people. How many senators will have the courage and the conviction to stand up for their constituencies in West Virginia, Ohio, North Dakota, Tennessee and elsewhere and vote to reject her nomination?
Draft 7-20-2011
The
Experiment that Failed and saved the World trillions.
Proving
the “greenhouse gas effect” does not exist!
By
Berthold Klein P.E November 16, 2010 revision 11-19-2010 REVISED
STARTING JULY 4,2011
PREAMBLE:
After hearing from a Ph. D in mechanical engineering and a teacher
of environmental studies that they could not follow this experiment
it is necessary to rewrite this experiment. It is necessary that
anyone that can read to be able to understand this experiment and
what it means. I made a mistake in the first edition as it is
created as I thought about it and did the experiment. This edition
is for everyone -the man on the street who would suffer the most by
government “1984 Big Brother” control and the Ph. D in social
studies or science.
I
have been communicating with some ordinary people and some Ph. D’s
and I realize that my mission is a “Mission Impossible” being
able to read does not mean that the reader can comprehend and that
having a Ph. D means that their ego and arrogance will get in the
way of comprehension. I will do my best with the help of those that
edit the new version , so here goes. There are many people that
have to be told what to believe> Are you one of these?
Before
this is released it will have been reviewed and edited by knowledge
individuals most will have minimal science education but do
understand that the Greenhouse Gas effect does not exist.
There
are several words or terms used in this revision that need some
explanation:
IR=
infrared radiation is a form of radiation(invisible light also know
as heat rays) that is present in sun light and is also radiated by
every body of mater whether it is a gas, a liquid or a solid. If
it is a living thing it will radiate more IR that if it is an
inanimate object because of its temperature.
IRag= Certain gases will absorb
different wavelengths (a characteristic of the light ) depending on
the construction of the gas. Some gases do not absorb IR , there
construction will not allow them to absorb the IR, they may absorb
other forms of radiation but as was said above they still radiate
IR. Many other materials including water will absorb IR. These
should not be included in the term IRags.
Water/l/v/s=Water
has some very important characteristic that are important to earth
and to live on earth. Because of earth’s fortunate location in the
universe ,it’s temperature varies from a low of-90 F to a high 130
F+. But in the majority of the earth temperatures are between 0 F
to 100 F. and water can change from a gas at all temperature ,to a
liquid at 32F(0C) or above,and a solid below 32 F.(0 C). Many
people who pretend to be scientists choose to ignore these facts
and call Water/l/v/s a “greenhouse gas” As we go through this
experiment it will become clearer why this is bad science.
CO2= a gas
that is breathed out by every living mammal and most other living
creature,it is absorbed by plants and algae and is them converted
back to oxygen which we need to live. Most process that produce
mechanical movements and electrical energy convert fossil fuels to
CO2( carbon dioxide) A very important and necessary part of live on
this planets.
CH4=
methane a part of “natural gas” used to heat homes ,cook food
and run engines as cars,buses and trucks,etc .It is present in the
ground along with oil but is only present in the air(atmosphere) at
very tiny amounts.( part per billion) While millions of tons of
this gas escape into the atmosphere most of this is destroyed by
interaction with Ozone(O3) and UV a very active radiation present
in sunlight.(this reaction is documented by a paper in the EPA
library) The Methane that is formed by bacteria is almost
everywhere. Its from swamps,rice paddies, bottom of oceans, lakes
and streams, decaying leave piles etc. It is a part of natures
process of recycling.
NO2= a gas
formed by nature when there is lightening. It is also formed in any
high temperature burning including engines. The gas is washed out
of the atmosphere in every rainstorm. It is used by plants, and is
very necessary for their growth.
To
demonstrate if the “greenhouse gas effect exists it is necessary
to define it.
The
hypotheses of the “greenhouse gas effect” is the process where a
combination of IR absorbing gases including
Water/vapor/liquid/solid,
CO2.CH4. NO2 and others are super insulation and cause the
atmosphere to be 33 degrees warmer than would be explained by the
“black body temperature” A term developed by a renowned
physicist as a theoretical way to compare radiation. There are only
a few materials and conditions that approach these theoretical
properties. (The earth and its atmosphere is not one of them.).
How
is this done? The hypothesis says that the IRag’s absorb the IR
radiation then it is “back radiated to earth causing the earth to
be warmer by the resonating of this heat energy.
This
is just the tip of the iceberg of the magic caused by the
“greenhouse gas effect”
as
has been said the truth is in the details therefore anyone that
wants to get into more of the details,please join in.
As
others have not started to define “The greenhouse gas effect”
lets start with what are the “features that should be testable!”
Because water/liquid, vapor,solid (H2O /lvs) is different than gases
IRag’s as CO2 ,Ch4,NO2 and others gases -the IRag’s will be dealt
with first.
Critical
features:
The
IRags absorb the IR radiation and thus prevents it from escaping
into space reducing the rate of atmospheric cool- it causes the air
to be warmer.
The
IRags will “back radiate” IR radiation to earth to cause
increased heating of the surface.
The
IRags will heat up by the absorption of the IR radiation thus
heating the air.
The
IRag’s have different levels of “back-forcing”.Thus CO2 is
supposed to be from 23 to 70 times more “back radiation “ than
air and CH4 (methane) is 1000 times that of air. Having ask
others how this is determined,( no answer yet) ,it is assumed that
someone has reviewed the amount of IR that a particular molecule
absorbs by a spectrophotometer analysis then comparing this to the
absorption of CO2. (I have not seen any experimental data that the
“back-forcing” relates to absorption).(an assumption based on
The Bohr model however a time factor is needed) This is a very
important feature of the “ghg effect”
The
higher the concentration of IRags the greater the amount of
“back-radiation” the higher the “global atmospheric
temperature will become.(were is the experimental data )
The
concentration of CO2 found in million year old Ice cores can be
used as proof that the “ghg effect” exists. When there is no
experimental data that proves that the “ghg effect”exists.
Where
does this lead?
We
all know that the “greenhouse”
effect exist. Anyone that has gotten into a hot car on a sunny
day.(summer or winter). Has walked into a store with south facing
window , its temperature will be much higher than a car ,or window
in the shade. This is caused by confined space heating- this was
established in 1909 by R.W. Wood a professor of Physics and Optics
at John Hopkins University from 1901 to 1955.
What
experiment could be performed to “prove” that the ”greenhouse
gas effect exists.
All
the AGW point out it is impossible to simulate what actually happens
in the atmosphere therefore they propose using computer models, the
problem with “computer models” is that unless all the factors
that effect the atmosphere are included into the program it is
“garbage in is garbage out”. When this is tried there are no
computers made that have sufficient capacity to handle all of the
factors. Many of the factors are not even fully know yet. Then the
big guess is what are the factors to include and which are really of
minor importance and can be left out and still get usable results.
To data no one has come up with the “right model”
Using
the list of “critical factor” lets see if there are some way of
indicating if the concept may exist.
To
use the concentration of IRags in the atmosphere for testing does
not work otherwise there would not be the controversy that exists
today. In the field of engineering and research there is the use of
“models”” or model similar factors that can be either up sized
or down sized that are either similar in behavior or can be
proportioned to a larger or smaller series of events that relate to
an actual set of events.
As
the amount of heating that is supposed to be added is on the order
of fractions of a degree per year- we need a more dramatic
experiment to show that the concept actually exists. If the
experiment at a much higher concentration does not demonstrate the
effect then the Concept does not exist. If the concept works at high
concentration then it can be tried with lower and lower
concentrations until a threshold of effects is reached.
Some
numbers are needed now: By definition 10,000 ppm is 1%, therefore
100 % equals 1million parts per million( 1×10+6) . Another way to
put it is if there are 1 million soldiers in the army and only one
has a gun ,he better have a lot of bullets if he is going to defend
the country. The atmosphere is supposed to contain 400 ppm (round
Number) therefore a concentration of 100% CO2 is 2500 time that of
what is in the atmosphere. If the effect exists it should be much
easier to measure and demonstrate that “back radiation” Is
causing a heating effect on the earth. .
Now
it is claimed that CH4 is from 23 to 70 time the effect of CO2,thus
using the lowers figure by using a concentration of 100 % CH4 ,the
effect should be 57500 time stronger that using CO2. It is claimed
that NO2 is 100 time more powerful that CO2 thus it should cause
250,000 X the effect of CO2 in the atmosphere
As
CH4 is found to be about 2ppB ( 2 X 10 -9)in the atmosphere , a
concentration of 100 % CH4 should give a results that is 5 X 10 + 10
times what exists in the atmosphere.
.
Now if CH4 is 23 times the effect of CO2 another longer chain
hydrocarbon molecule will be even more powerful thus the proposed
experiment shown below was done with 100 % butane.
The
experiment shown below substituted “natural gas” a mixture of
70% CH4 about 29% CO2 and the remainder is H2 and other trace gases.
This is readily available for test purposed from any natural gas
stove. Now 100 % CO2 is available for several sources, but one that
is not too expensive is from any Paint ball supply store, another is
from a supplier of Dry ice. Do not use Alka Seltzer as you have to
put this in water to get the CO2 thus you have a mixture of CO2 and
water and water vapor – you are not testing the effect of CO2
only. Discussion of H2O/lvs in the atmosphere will follow later.
The
natural gas mixture should have a combined effect of less that 100%
CH4 by a weighted average of 70% CH4+ 29% CO2or 3.500000725X10+9
times the effect of CO2 in the atmosphere. If this occurs the
temperature increase must be measurable.
How
does the experiment contain the high concentration of the IRags for
this test? Having reviewed several experiments that contained the
IRags is glass containers then they measures the increase in
temperature of the gas which had increased, they claimed this
increase was do to the “ghg”effect, they are absolutely wrong.
The cause of the temperature increase was do to the heating of the
glass by its absorbing the IR and the glass heating. ( A Master’s
thesis (peer reviewed) with this information is available on
request). Another failure of these tests were their including a
black cardboard inside the containers, thus additional heating of
the IRag’s from conduction of heat from the black cardboard. (They
created a Greenhouse effect-confined space heating)
The
proper way to contain the high concentration of IRags is in a thin
walled material that will not absorb the IR and heat. The experiment
used crystal clear Mylar balloons. They are available in various
sizes, several 20 inch diameter(major diameter) were chosen. If you
want you can use larger ones to contain larger numbers of IRag
molecules.
Now
lets discuss the experiment.
Fill
the balloons with the various IRags ,and one with dry air as a
control.
Let
the balloons reach ambient temperature. If you are going to use
sunlight let it adjust outside in the shade.
Use
an IR thermometer to check the temperatures of each balloon, use a
digital thermometer that reads to 0.1 degree to check air
temperature in the shade. Record data.
Take
a large black mate board or a large black cloth or sheet and lay it
on the ground in the sun. Use the IR thermometer to check the
temperature as it raises in the sun. Record the data. When it
appears to reach a maximum then go to step 5.
Suspend
the balloons over the black background (about 1 foot above) and
measure the temperature of the balloons initially. Record the
temperature.
Measure
the temperature of the black background in the “shadow” of each
of the balloons also measure the temperature of the black
background outside of the “shadows” of the balloons.
Now
lets repeat the Critical factors and note the result of my test to
the critical factor.
Critical
features:
The
IRags absorb the IR radiation and thus prevents it from escaping
into space reducing the rate of atmospheric cool- it causes the air
to be warmer. The
air between the balloons and the black background did not change
temperature.
The
IRags will “back radiate” IR radiation to earth to cause
increased heating of the surface. The
black background did not change temperature either in the “shadow”
or outside the shadow. The temperature of the black background
heated to 20 t0 30 degrees above ambient before the balloons were
placed over the black background. When this was done outside in
bright sun light the black background heated to 130 to 140 degrees
F. Similar temperature can be measured from black asphalt. When the
experiment was done with the 500 watt power shop light (see
below)inside the black background went from ambient of 70-72
degrees to 100 -110 degrees. Again when measuring the temperatures
of the black background with the IR thermometer there was no
measurable temperature difference anywhere along the surface.
The
IRags will heat up by the absorption of the IR radiation thus
heating the air. The
balloons did not warn any warmer than ambient. The IRags in the
balloons will not warm because that would be a violation of the
Bohr Model.
The
IRag’s have different levels of “back-forcing”. Having ask
others how this is determined,( no answer yet) ,it is assumed that
someone has reviewed the amount of IR that a particular molecule
absorbs by a spectrophotometer analysis then comparing this to the
absorption of CO2. (I have not seen any experimental data that the
“back-forcing” relates to absorption).(an assumption based on
The Bohr model however a time factor is needed) As
there was no temperature difference under any of the balloons,
there was no stronger “back-forcing” because the IRag absorbed
more IR radiation.
The
higher the concentration of IRags the greater the amount of
“back-radiation” the higher the “global atmospheric
temperature will become.(were
is the experimental data )
The
concentration of CO2 found in million year old Ice cores can be
used as proof that the “ghg effect” exists. When
there is no experimental data that proves that the “ghg
effect”exists.
Specifications
of the IR thermometer: model: MTPRO laser-Micro Temp; temperature
range: -41degree C/F to 1040 degrees F. IR range 5 to 16 nm. Angle
of view D:S =11:1
cost
about $60.00. many other models available.
I
have thought about several refinements, but it would not
change the bottom line that the “ghg effect” is a fairy-tale.
I’m
sure that the AGW’s will not believe this proves that the
“greenhouse gas effect does not exists , therefore I challenge
them to come up with an experiment that they claim “proves the
existence of the “greenhouse gas effect”.
As
an alternate light source the experiment has been performed with an
incandescent light. By using a 500 watt shop power light which
because of the temperature of the filament approach the spectral
characteristics of the Sun light ( should have more long wave IR
because of a lower temperature) It was place one(1) meter away from
the balloons to avoid conduction and convection heating of the
balloons. As is stated above there was no difference in the final
results.
Now
lets talk about water( H2O/lvs):
Yes
H2O/lvs has a major effect on weather conditions, where I’m at in
Northern Ohio it just started to rain, if it gets any colder we will
have snow or sleet. Of course tomorrow it may be sunny and clear. As
is said in the Great Lakes region if you don’t like the weather wait
15 minutes and it will change. Now the “climate” has not changed
for the last 300 years just ask the Indians.
Any
way lets look a H2O/lvs in the atmosphere : If its clear the
humidity can be from near 0 % relative humidity to 100%. Now if it
‘s cloudy the “relative Humidity” can vary from 30 to 100%
depending on temperatures, Now we know that the air temperature
where the clouds are forming is at or below the “dew point”, now
as the H2O vapor cools to form clouds there is a release of energy(
Heat of condensation), if the general air temperature is low enough
( below freezing) more energy is released as ice or snow is formed.
This energy has to be dissipated either as IR radiation or as
lightening or probably high winds or tornado.
This
is only one phase of the complex weather conditions when H2O/lvs is
being evaluated another is the solar heating of clouds both day and
night. During the day the warming of the top of clouds is obvious
but it is also relevant that in spite of significant solar
absorption the “clouds “ have not absorbed enough radiation to
convert the water or solids back to vapor; there is probably a rapid
turbulent exchange of energy in both directions from evaporation/
sublimation to condensing, to freezing. This is why “climatologists”
can not get the correct “sign” on the “forcing” it is a
constantly changing set of conditions, non are wrong and non are
correct.
Now
lets add the next variable- solar heating at night of the clouds.
Having taken IR radiation measurements at night for the last year at
many different times by solar time it is apparent that when the sun
goes down below the visible horizon , the clouds are still receiving
solar energy. This has been confirmed by both measurements and
visible lighting (multiple colors ) of the clouds. The clouds and
the atmosphere cool until about 2:00 am when there is measurable
increases in cloud temperatures and air temperatures. This warming
continues until daylight is visible. The degree of warming is
related to the time of year and what is happening with the jet
stream and arctic storms.
There
are other factors that are being monitored by real astrophysics
researcher that are showing that Solar flares, and different type of
radiation have an effect on cloud formation,this is only a beginning
of learning about our atmosphere.
There
is no way in the world of Fairy-tales that CO2 can have an effect on
weather or “climate”
The
nice thing about this experiment is that it can be done by high
school physics classes or freshmen college physics lab classes . It
would teach a very important lesson in that “not all experiments
have to have a “positive” end result to be meaningful.
Mann-made
global warming is a hoax,because the “greenhouse gas effect” is
a fairy -tale.
Berthold
Klein P.E.
November
19, 2010
List
of references:
The
paper “Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effect
within the frame of physics” by Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D.
Tscheuschner is an in-depth examination of the subject. Version 4
2009
Electronic
version of an article published as International
Journal of Modern Physics
B,
Vol. 23, No. 3 (2009) 275{364 ,
DOI No: 10.1142/S021797920904984X, c World
Scientific
Publishing Company, http://www.worldscinet.com/ijmpb.
Report
of Alan Carlin of US-EPA March, 2009 that shows that CO2 does not
cause global warming.
Greenhouse
Gas Hypothesis Violates Fundamentals
of Physics” by
Dipl-Ing Heinz Thieme This work has about 10 or 12 link
that
support the truth that the greenhouse gas effect is a hoax.
R.W.Wood
from
the London, Edinborough and Dublin Philosophical Magazine , 1909,
vol 17, p319-320. Cambridge UL shelf mark p340.1.c.95, i
The
Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory
By
Alan
Siddons
from:http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/the_hidden_flaw_in_greenhouse.html
at March 01, 2010 – 09:10:34 AM CST
The
below information was a foot note in the IPCC 4 edition. It is
obvious that there was no evidence to prove that the ghg effect
exists.
“In
the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth’s natural
greenhouse effect and suggested
that
slight changes in the atmospheric composition could
bring
about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish
scientist Svante Arrhenius first speculated
that
changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could
substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse
effect.”
After
1909 when R.W.Wood proved that the understanding of the greenhouse
effect was in error and the ghg effect does not exist. After Niels
Bohr published his work and receive a Nobel Prize in Physics in
1922. The fantasy of the greenhouse gas effect should have died in
1909 and 1922. Since then it has been shown by several physicists
that the concept is a Violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Obviously
the politicians don’t give a dam that they are lying. It fits in
with what they do every hour of every day .Especially the current
pretend president.
Paraphrasing
Albert Einstein after the Publishing of “The Theory of Relativity”
–one fact out does 1 million “scientist, 10 billion politicians
and 20 billion environmental whachos-that don’t know what” The
Second Law of thermodynamics” is.
University
of Pennsylvania Law School
ILE
INSTITUTE
FOR LAW
AND ECONOMICS
A
Joint Research Center of the Law School, the Wharton School,
and
the Department of Economics in the School of Arts and Sciences
at
the University of Pennsylvania
RESEARCH
PAPER
NO.
10-08
Global
Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination
Jason
Scott Johnston
UNIVERSITY
OF PENNSYLVANIA
May
2010
This
paper can be downloaded without charge from the
Social
Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection:
http://ssrn.
Israeli
Astrophysicist Nir Shaviv: ‘There
is no direct evidence showing that CO2 caused 20th century warming,
or as a matter of fact, any warming’
link to this paper on climate depot.
Slaying
the Sky Dragon – Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory [Kindle
Edition]
Tim
Ball (Author), Claes
Johnson (Author), Martin
Hertzberg (Author), Joseph
A. Olson (Author), Alan
Siddons (Author), Charles
Anderson (Author), Hans
Schreuder (Author), John
O’Sullivan (Author)
Web-
site references:
http://www.americanthinker.com
Ponder
the Maunder
wwwclimatedepot.com
icecap.us
http://www.stratus-sphere.com
SPPI
The
Great Climate Clash -archives December, 2010 , G3 The greenhouse
gas effect does not exist.( not yet peer reviewed).
many
others are available.
The
bottom line is that the facts show that the greenhouse gas effect
is a fairy-tale and that Man-made global warming is the World
larges Scam!!!The IPCC and Al Gore should be charged under the US
Anti-racketeering act and when convicted – they should spend the
rest of their lives in jail for the Crimes they have committed
against Humanity.
The
only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance.”
—Albert
Einstein
“Democracy
is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty
is a well-armed lamb.” Benjamin Franklin
I
Yes it is – I like the quote from Benjamin Franklin that democracy “is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb.”
But what the true principles of having a limited constitutional monarchy?
I hope meaningful organisations will understand the true priciples better. – J.P.K.
P.S.: the ideological and philosophical doctrine of environmentalism is still a bane to both humans and the environment, so keep looking more closely at RIGHT NOW. Thanks again very much.
Some recent articles are saying that wind turbine farms around the country are being abandoned. Of course they didn’t produce anything like the power they were supposed to but that wasn’t really the point. The point was to get billions of federal dollars flying around so the connected could more easily siphon off a larger share. Funny how rarely the government ever bothers to try to crack down on such theft going back to the post Civil War railroad boom or even scams during the Revolution itself.