Archive | Global Warming RSS feed for this section

Obama has no regrets on Solyndra scandal

4 Oct

 

The RNC has a new ad out today:

“How can a President watch $535 million in taxpayer funds get destroyed in a vain attempt to prop up an investment for a campaign donor, and then claim to have no regrets over the failure? The RNC would like Americans to ask themselves that question, and they produced a new 45-second spot focusing on the collapse of Solyndra. The ad actually picks its attack carefully, avoiding references to George Kaiser at all. Instead it just hammers Obama on having bad business sense in putting so much cash on a “bad bet”:”

 

 

 

Advertisements

Hurricane Irene = Global Warming?

29 Aug

Not to anyone’s surprise, the liberal media happily ran with the “Hurricane Irene = Global Warming” theme this week:

1.  From The Daily Beast,  “Irene’s got a middle name, and it’s Global Warming.”

2.  From Climate Central, “is this weather disaster caused by climate change?”

3.  From the NY Times, “are hurricanes getting worse because of human-induced climate change?”

And finally, on a different note, from the climate expert Al Gore, who this week compared the struggle against climate skeptics to the fight against racism during the civil rights movement.

When racist comments would come up in the course of conversations, “There came a time when people said, ‘Hey man, why do you talk that way? That’s wrong, I don’t go for that, so don’t talk that way around me. I just don’t believe that.'”

So, if you don’t believe in “man-made global warming,” you are no different than those in the sixties that were trying to hang on to segregation and racism.  Wow.  I’d say that we are only skeptical because of hacks like Al Gore and his liberal “scientists” who have been caught fabricating data to get the results that support the conclusions they are looking for.

Obama’s “Hot Air” Alternative Energy Plan

13 May

Impressive Performance by EPA Official

17 Apr

More here.

“Why I Will Leave My Lights On”

5 Apr

Great piece by Ross McKitrick in the Vancouver Sun from last month titled “Earth Hour:  Why I Will Leave My Lights On” (emphasis mine):

In 2009 I was asked by a journalist for my thoughts on the importance of Earth Hour. Here is my response.

I abhor Earth Hour. Abundant, cheap electricity has been the greatest source of human liberation in the 20th century. Every material social advance in the 20th century depended on the proliferation of inexpensive and reliable electricity. Giving women the freedom to work outside the home depended on the availability of electrical appliances that free up time from domestic chores. Getting children out of menial labour and into schools depended on the same thing, as well as the ability to provide safe indoor lighting for reading.

Development and provision of modern health care without electricity is absolutely impossible. The expansion of our food supply, and the promotion of hygiene and nutrition, depended on being able to irrigate fields, cook and refrigerate foods, and have a steady indoor supply of hot water. Many of the world’s poor suffer brutal environmental conditions in their own homes because of the necessity of cooking over indoor fires that burn twigs and dung. This causes local deforestation and the proliferation of smoke- and parasite-related lung diseases. Anyone who wants to see local conditions improve in the third world should realize the importance of access to cheap electricity from fossil-fuel based power generating stations. After all, that’s how the west developed.

The whole mentality around Earth Hour demonizes electricity. I cannot do that, instead I celebrate it and all that it has provided for humanity. Earth Hour celebrates ignorance, poverty and backwardness. By repudiating the greatest engine of liberation it becomes an hour devoted to anti-humanism. It encourages the sanctimonious gesture of turning off trivial appliances for a trivial amount of time, in deference to some ill-defined abstraction called “the Earth,” all the while hypocritically retaining the real benefits of continuous, reliable electricity. People who see virtue in doing without electricity should shut off their fridge, stove, microwave, computer, water heater, lights, TV and all other appliances for a month, not an hour. And pop down to the cardiac unit at the hospital and shut the power off there too.

I don’t want to go back to nature. Travel to a zone hit by earthquakes, floods and hurricanes to see what it’s like to go back to nature. For humans, living in “nature” meant a short life span marked by violence, disease and ignorance. People who work for the end of poverty and relief from disease are fighting against nature. I hope they leave their lights on.

Here in Ontario, through the use of pollution control technology and advanced engineering, our air quality has dramatically improved since the 1960s, despite the expansion of industry and the power supply. If, after all this, we are going to take the view that the remaining air emissions outweigh all the benefits of electricity, and that we ought to be shamed into sitting in darkness for an hour, like naughty children who have been caught doing something bad, then we are setting up unspoiled nature as an absolute, transcendent ideal that obliterates all other ethical and humane obligations. No thanks. I like visiting nature but I don’t want to live there, and I refuse to accept the idea that civilization with all its tradeoffs is something to be ashamed of.

“You Can’t Separate Science from Politics”

31 Mar

This is truly amazing.  It is a quick glimpse into the damage that fraudulent environmentalists in California have inflicted on a small business owner, Dwayne Whitney, and a whistle-blower professor at UCLA (who was fired for speaking out).  “New rules on diesel emissions make Dwayne Whitney’s trucks illegal to operate without enormously expensive additions, rules CARB imposed because of a study on particulates produced by Dr. Hien Tran that linked the emissions to 2000 “premature deaths” in California each year.”  Environmentalist fraudster, Dr. Hien Tran, was later exposed as a fraud when it was discovered that his PhD had come from a diploma mill, bought for $1000.

 

When the researcher, UCLA’s Dr. James Enstrom, blew the whistle on Tran and insisted that CARB needed to consider his work before passing the new regulation, a curious thing happened. After 34 years on the job, UCLA fired Enstrom. Why? Perhaps it has to do with the fact that two powerful CARB commissioners, Mary Nichols and John Froines, are also UCLA professors. According to Balaker, Froines voted to give Enstrom his pink slip.

Professor Robert Phalen, Co-Director of Air Pollution Health Effects Laboratory, UC-Irvine weighed in:

“we see public fears being exploited in order to maintain the funding to agencies”

Environmentalists and their policies cost more jobs and progress than any other group in our country and they need to be stopped.  If the media did its job, these people would have lost all credibility years ago.

Who’s Ready for a Mileage Tax?

25 Mar

Hot Air has the story:

“Dumb ideas never die in Washington, DC.  They just get stuck in committee.  Proving that once again is outgoing Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND), attempting to revive an idea for a new tax that was so intrusive and unwieldy that even Barack Obama had to disavow it two years ago when his Transportation Secretary starting pushing the notion.  Conrad points to a new CBO study saying that taxing Americans on their car mileage will provide a windfall for the federal government:”

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) this week released a report that said taxing people based on how many miles they drive is a possible option for raising new revenues and that these taxes could be used to offset the costs of highway maintenance at a time when federal funds are short.

Psst…hey, liberals…that is what the gasoline tax is for.  So, the government wants an additional tax to pay for the same thing.  Perfect!  I’m sure all of the hard-working members of the middle class, who are out of work or struggling to keep their heads above water right now would really benefit from this tax.

Senator Conrad makes a very revealing point (emphasis mine):

Conrad said in response that federal funds are tight, and in asking for recommendations on how to raise that money, he noted the possibility of a VMT tax as a way to solve the problem of collecting less in taxes as people move to more fuel-efficient vehicles.

“Do we do gas tax?” Conrad asked. “Do we move to some kind of an assessment that is based on how many miles vehicles go, so that we capture revenue from those who are going to be using the roads who aren’t going to be paying any gas tax, or very little, with hybrids and electric cars?”

Get it?  The government wants to reward all of people, who have bought into the notion that they should drive hybrid or electric cars to save the planet, by raising their taxes.  If you drive a car that gets better gas mileage, then you are paying less in gas taxes to the government.  The government can’t live with that, so they have to get creative to find a way to get the money out of you that they would have gotten if you’d been driving a planet-destroying SUV.

Sounds about right.  The government, along with liberal activists, convinces people to do a certain activity, then raises their taxes when that activity ends up reducing revenue to the government.