Greenies are up in arms over another environmental scandal of their own making. A TV documentary, shown on Britain’s left-wing Channel 4, has been shocked to discover that old hardwood forests in the U.S. are being chopped down, exported to the UK and burned for what is laughably being billed as “green” energy.
Huge areas of hardwood forest in the state of Virginia are being chainsawed to create ‘biomass’ energy in Britain as the government attempts to reach targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in efforts to tackle climate change, an investigation by Channel 4 Dispatches has found.
A key part of government efforts to hit its green energy targets is to switch from generating electricity from burning coal to burning wood – or so-called biomass. It’s a policy that is costing taxpayers more than £700 million per year through a levy on their electricity bills.
Well fancy that. Enviroloons caught once again killing the planet in order to save it.
Oscar Wilde would have called this “the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in the glass”.
Most of the world’s deadliest pollution is concentrated in the Third World, largely among poor households which have little or no access to electricity produced by fossil-fuel power.
Serious pollution in the West, however, is negligible.
This is the clear message of the latest State of Global Airreport produced by the Health Effects Institute and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation.
But it is not, needless to say, how it is being reported in the liberal media.
The Guardian, for example, headlines its story: “More than 95% of world’s population breathe dangerous air, major study finds”.
This sounds bad, until you realize that the “dangerous” air being talked about here is only “dangerous” because it contains concentrations of particulate matter known as PM2.5.
Unexpectedly early, a new solar minimum has arrived.
The signs are that it could be one of the weakest in centuries, potentially ushering in the most serious bout of global cooling since the 17th century’s Maunder Minimum.
You might think the climate alarmists would be happy about this: after all, what better antidote to the horrors of “global warming” than a bracing dose of global cooling?
Instead, they are trying to divert attention by reviving one of their favorite old scare stories: the one about how ‘climate change’ is causing the Gulf Stream to alter its course, just like in The Day After Tomorrow.
This latest version of the scare story originated in the alarmist journal Nature and was then amplified by the Germany’s Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact, ground zero for the most extreme form of pseudo-scientific climate alarmism.
Environmentalism has a long history of attracting cranks, loons and zealots.
There was the Unabomber, whose Manifesto was all but indistinguishable from Al Gore’s Earth in Balance.
There was James Lee, the eco-terrorist who in 2010 was shot by police at the Discovery Channel after taking hostages, leaving behind rambling messages protesting about “overpopulation” and the need to “the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies.”
Now there is David S Buckel, a lawyer who burnt himself to death in Prospect Park, Brooklyn, apparently in the belief that this would set some kind of moral example to all those people out there bent on destroying the planet.
Susan Crockford is a polar bear expert with a message that climate alarmists don’t want to hear: polar bear populations are thriving and are certainly in no danger from thinning summer sea ice supposedly caused by ‘man-made global warming.’
That’s why the alarmist establishment is currently trying destroy her.
First came a hatchet job in Bioscience, described by climate scientist Judith Curry as “absolutely the stupidest paper I have ever seen published.”
Crockford’s rebuttal is epic and can be read in full here.
Now, the New York Times has weighed in with a piece entitled ‘Climate Change Denialists Say Polar Bears Are Fine. Scientists Are Pushing Back’.
The headline has been poorly subbed. “Scientists” should be in danger quotation marks.
Its introductory paragraph will give you a taste of its quality:
Britain has just suffered its worst winter death toll in 42 years.
According to the Daily Star:
It is estimated that 20,275 Brits more than average died between December and March.
An additional 2,000 deaths more than average were expected due to cold conditions between March 23 and 31, this winter’s average death rates show.
Campaigners have called the deaths a “national tragedy” as cold weather victims fatalities could be prevented – especially in the elderly.
According to the Office of National Statistics, one in 10 cold weather deaths are among under-65s, one in 10 among 65-75s and eight in 10 among over-75s.
The Department of Health also said cold conditions worsen winter killers including flu, chest diseases, heart attacks, strokes and dementia.
It means this winter is set to total at least 48,000 deaths due to cold weather – which works out at an average of one death every three and a half minutes.
But what’s more shocking still is that the UK government – claiming to be Conservative, last time I looked – is actually boasting about the disastrous policy which helped kill them.
Here is what Energy Minister Claire Perry had to say on the tenth anniversary of the 2008 Climate Change Act – the most ruinous and pointless piece of legislation in recent British parliamentary history – which is largely responsible for making energy so expensive that the poor and vulnerable cannot afford to heat their homes.
President Trump has once again come out in defense of his embattled Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt.
While Security spending was somewhat more than his predecessor, Scott Pruitt has received death threats because of his bold actions at EPA. Record clean Air & Water while saving USA Billions of Dollars. Rent was about market rate, travel expenses OK. Scott is doing a great job!
Trump has finally risen to the defense of his embattled EPA chief Scott Pruitt. Quite right too, for Pruitt is by some margin the best Administrator the Environmental Protection Agency has had since it was founded by Richard Nixon in 1970.
This is not just because Pruitt is so good. It’s also because his predecessors were so bad. Not merely incompetent, but in several cases actively corrupt, dishonest, and criminal.
As Steve Milloy notes here, all three past Democrat EPA administrators flagrantly violated public records laws, including the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA):
The Maldives – that Indian Ocean island group allegedly most threatened by global warming – is building a new runway at its international airport.
According to the Maldives Independent:
The 3,400-meter-long, 60-meter-wide runway will open the airport to the Airbus A380 jetliner, the world’s largest passenger airline.
The US$400 million runway project was awarded to China’s Beijing Urban Construction Group as part of ambitious plans to upgrade the country’s main international airport. The Chinese construction giant will also build a fuel farm with a storage capacity of 45 million litres and a cargo complex with the capacity to handle 120,000 tonnes.
Reclamation work to expand the airport island by some 62 hectares was subcontracted to the Dubai-based Gulf Cobla.
The Maldivian government secured a US$373 million concessionary loan from the Chinese EXIM Bank in December 2015 for the runway project. Loan agreements worth US$200 million have also been signed with the Saudi Fund for Development, the Kuwait Fund and the OPEC Fund to finance the airport expansion.
A contract was signed with the Saudi Binladin Group in May 2015 to build a new passenger terminal for an undisclosed amount.
So: Chinese, Saudi and Kuwaiti money and Chinese engineers to build a new runway on coral atolls which – according to environmentalists – are one of the places at the world most at risk from ‘climate change’.
President Trump is winning at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
There can be no better proof of this than the latest anguished editorial in the New York Times, lamenting the changes made by EPA administrator Scott Pruitt.
The EPA, it claims, is the “epicenter of denial.” Its new regime is “terrified” of thwarting “Trump’s promise to ease regulations on fossil fuel companies and increase their profits”. Its every new action flies in the face of all the regulatory efforts made by such experts as Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, ex-EPA administrator Gina McCarthy and some guy from the Union of Concerned Scientists.
What’s not to like?
Steve Milloy, a writer more familiar with the EPA’s past dirty tricks than almost anyone, has compiled a glorious, line-by-line demolition of the Times‘s editorial.