Scott Pruitt Says No to CO2 and Social Justice at EPA

Pruitt
AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki

Two pieces of excellent news from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) show that incoming administrator Scott Pruitt is doing the Lord’s work.

First, he has come clean and said what he should have ‘fessed up to a while back: he doesn’t believe in the Carbon Fairy.

Asked his views on the role of carbon dioxide, the heat-trapping gas produced by burning fossil fuels, in increasing global warming, Mr. Pruitt said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” that “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so, no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.”

That phrase, “the heat-trapping gas produced by burning fossil fuels,” is just a bit of New York Times editorializing, by the way. No serious person thinks that man-made carbon dioxide poses any kind of major climate threat because there’s just no evidence to support that theory. It’s just one of those cherished left-liberal myths that goes next to other fantasy concepts like “equality,” “sustainability,” and “social justice.”

Speaking of which, the second piece of good news is that the Environmental Protection Agency has just lost its head of Environmental Justice.

Probably you didn’t know that the EPA had a head of Environmental Justice, but you should because you’ve been paying his salary since the George H.W. Bush era. His name is Mustafa Ali, and, according to a tearful requiem in Inside Climate, he has resigned in protest at EPA budget cuts, which will see the agency lose 20 percent of its 15,000 staff and $2 billion from its $8 billion.

“Jumped before he was pushed” is the phrase that comes to mind, for it is likely that Ali’s department will be dismantled altogether.

Ali has written a resignation letter to Scott Pruitt saying what a mistake this would be.

But if you go to the EPA’s website and see what the Environmental Justice Department has been doing for the last few years, you may disagree with this assessment.

Check out this page About EJ 2020.

By the end, you’ll have no more idea what the Environmental Justice Department does than you did at the beginning.

Here’s a taste:

Through EJ 2020, EPA will advance our environmental justice efforts to a new level in improving the health and environment of overburdened communities. By 2020, we will:

  • Improve on-the-ground results for overburdened communities through reduced impacts and enhanced benefits
  • Institutionalize environmental justice integration in EPA decision-making
  • Build robust partnerships with states, tribes and local governments
  • Strengthen our ability to take action on environmental justice and cumulative impacts
  • Better address complex national environmental justice issues.

Our vision of how EPA will make a difference in the environmental and public health landscape over the next five years is detailed on the key results page of the plan.

It is, as I think you’ll agree, pure gibberish. How do you measure this department’s success in advancing the cause of “environmental justice”? Well, of course, you don’t. You can’t because “environmental justice” is a nebulous concept, which can mean pretty much anything you want it to mean.

Reading between the lines, though, what you can guess is that it’s basically another race-guilt make-work scheme. It’s based on the (spurious, identity-politics-driven) notion that environmental problems are felt more keenly by people of color because they live in poorer areas more vulnerable to pollution.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

President Trump Must Not Wobble on Climate Change – Whatever Ivanka Says…

If she wants a pony and bats her eyelashes at me, I’ll be off in a trice to buy her a herd. Baby unicorn ponies, if that’s what she prefers. With jewels inlaid in their spiral horns and maybe some magical attachment that plays the collected works of Taylor Swift while she rides.

So I totally get where President Trump is coming from when I read reports that, under the influence of Ivanka and her husband Jared Kushner, he has toned the phrasing of an Executive Order so that it no longer includes derogatory comments about the utterly useless and pointless climate deal signed in Paris in 2015 by Barack Obama.

Kushner and Ivanka “intervened to strike language about the climate deal from an earlier draft of the executive order,” sources familiar with the matter told The Wall Street Journal.

Ivanka and her husband “have been considered a moderating influence on the White House’s position on climate change and environmental issues,” WSJ reports. Now, the executive order will have no mention of the so-called Paris agreement.

If it’s just a case of casual daughter-pleasing, fine. But if he actually means it than we should all start to worry.

I’ve said it before but it’s worth saying again: if President Trump proves to be as radical on energy and climate as he promised to be on the campaign trail, then this, even if he achieves nothing else, will more than qualify him for a place next to the greats on Mt Rushmore.

He will go down in history as the hero who slew ManBearPig: the president who, unlike his pusillanimous, career-safe, Establishment predecessors from Clinton and the Bushes to the ultimate horror that was Obama, finally had the courage, integrity and honesty to point out that the Climate Emperor is wearing no clothes; the guy who brought to the end the greatest scientific scandal ever; who saved Western Industrial Civilisation from the Watermelons.

But it’s all very well having good instincts and good intentions. The hard part will be dealing with all the obstacles thrown in his way by the monstrously large group of special interests sometimes known as the Green Blob and sometimes as the Climate Industrial Complex.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Would You Buy a Used Carbon Tax from Hank Paulson?

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

“I screwed up the economy, your jobs and your mortgages so – hey – I’m just the guy you can trust to tell you what to do about climate change!”

That was my take home message of a piece Hank Paulson penned for the New York Times a couple of years ago on the urgent need for a carbon tax.

Two years on – with fellow GOP Establishment stooges James Baker and George Shultz – he’s still harping on the same tedious theme.

This copper-bottomed, ocean-going shyster Paulson is the kind of Dubya-period  throwback whose advice the Trump administration should avoid like the plague.

As Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson not only failed to predict the 2008 financial crash – the US economy is “very healthy” and “robust” he insisted in 2007 – but it’s quite possible that his encouragement of risky lending while he was at Goldman Sachs helped cause it.

But that’s because Paulson is the very embodiment of the liberal elite which both the Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump were designed to overthrow.

Paulson may notionally identify as a Republican. Or, at least, he served with a “Republican” administration. But what’s quite evident from his demands for a carbon tax is that he belongs to that shiftless DC/corporatist/bankster elite which couldn’t give two hoots whether it’s a Democrat or Republican in charge, just so long as the elite get to maintain their power base and their revenue stream.

Note how, back in 2014 when he was calling for that carbon tax in the New York Times, he boasted about teaming up with Tom Steyer (arch-liberal hedge funder, creator of the NextGen super PAC) and Michael Bloomberg. These men are not conservatives.

What they are is crony capitalists. They are the embodiment of almost everything that America voted against when it voted for Donald Trump.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Ronald Reagan Would Have Hated this Stupid ‘Conservative’ Carbon Tax Idea

Joe Raedle/Getty Images, Rusty Kennedy/AP Photo

Donald Trump should pursue a regressive, counterproductive, pointless tax policy to deal with a non-existent problem because it’s “what the Gipper would have wanted.”

Yeah, right.

What the late Ronald Reagan is actually doing right now, I strongly suspect, is reaching for the celestial sickbag over this absurd proposal – endorsed by, amongst others, his former Secretary of State George Shultz – that President Trump should bring in a “carbon tax” in order to “combat climate change.”

Obviously the New York Times is very excited about this proposal because it thinks it’s a sign that conservatives are seeing the light:

A group of Republican elder statesmen is calling for a tax on carbon emissions to fight climate change.

The group, led by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, with former Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Henry M. Paulson Jr., a former secretary of the Treasury, says that taxing carbon pollution produced by burning fossil fuels is “a conservative climate solution” based on free-market principles.

Mr. Baker is scheduled to meet on Wednesday with White House officials, including Vice President Mike Pence, Jared Kushner, the senior adviser to the president, and Gary D. Cohn, director of the National Economic Council, as well as Ivanka Trump.

Nope. What this story actually does is remind us of one of the main reasons why Donald Trump – and not any of his more Establishment rivals – ended up winning the GOP nomination: because the GOP Establishment had drifted so far away from the conservative principles they were supposed to uphold that they might just as well have been Democrats.

According to Baker: “I’m not at all sure the Gipper wouldn’t have been very happy with this.”

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

NOAA Scandal Gives Trump the Perfect Excuse to Drain the Climate Swamp

DOMINIQUE FAGET/AFP/Getty

So NOAA deliberately fiddled the climate data to hide the “pause” in global warming in time for the UN’s COP21 Paris talks.

Really, this whistleblowing revelation couldn’t have come at a better time for Donald Trump.

In the field of energy and climate, President Trump has said that there is a massive swamp that needs draining.

But his efforts are being resisted at every turn by all those lying scientists, bent politicians, rent-seeking businessmen, and Soros-funded activist groups who  insist: “What swamp? What crocodiles? What leeches? Nothing to see here!”

What the whistleblowing NOAA insider John Bates has just done is prove beyond reasonable doubt what some of us have long claimed: that from NASA GISS and NOAA across the pond to the UEA and the Met Office’s Hadley Centre, the world’s leading temperature data sets have been hijacked by climate activists and abused to advance a political agenda.

Here at Breitbart we smelt a rat from the moment NOAA released its dodgy, “Pause-busting” study two years ago.

As we reported, with perhaps a hint of snark, in “‘Hide the Hiatus!’. How the Climate Alarmists Eliminated The Inconvenient Pause In Global Warming” the paper seemed to have been produced by two alarmist shills at NOAA – Tom Karl and Thomas Peterson – with the express purpose of confounding sceptics in the run up to Paris.

The thrust of Karl’s paper is this: that far from staying flat since 1998, global temperatures have carried on rising. It’s just that scientists haven’t noticed before because they’ve been looking in the wrong place – on land, rather than in the sea where all the real heat action is happening. And how did Karl et al. notice what everyone else has missed until now? Well, by using a specialised scientific technique called “getting your excuses in early before the Paris climate conference in December.” Essentially, this technique involves making adjustments to the raw temperature data (sound familiar?) and discovering – lo! – that the sceptics were wrong and the alarmists were right all along. Karl’s paper makes much of the fact that the methods used for gathering sea temperature data have changed over the years: in the old days it used to involve buckets; more recently, engine intake thermometers. Hence his excuse for these magical “adjustments”. Apparently (amazingly, conveniently), the measurements used since 1998 have been “running cold” and therefore needed correcting in a (handy) upward direction in order to show what has really been happening to global warming. Once you realise this – global warming turns out to be as real and present and dangerous as ever it was.

In October 2015, we followed up with a story headlined: “NOAA Attempts To Hide The Pause In Global Warming: The Most Disgraceful Cover Up Since Climategate.”

This reported on how NOAA had refused to give up its documents in response to a subpoena by Rep Lamar Smith (R-Texas) who also smelt a rat – and just needed some raw data to prove it.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Liberal Mega-Donor Tom Steyer Gives up on Climate Change (Because No One Cares…)

steyer
AP

Tom Steyer – the hedge fund guy with the annoying tartan tie – has decided to quit green advocacy politics and move“beyond climate change” in order to campaign on something – anything – that people actually give a damn about.

“We want to know what matters most to you, and what should be done,” he pleads, desperately, in a new video.

Let us pause for a moment and savour the man’s absurdity, chutzpah and brazen hypocrisy.

Here is a guy who, for the last decade, has been telling us that climate change is the most important issue of our time.

That’s why he spent millions of his personal fortune in the last two election cycles promoting liberal causes and supporting Democrat candidates: in order – as  he puts it on the website of his NextGenClimate SuperPac – to “prevent climate disaster.”

So what exactly has happened to make this great green philanthropist change his mind?

Did the planet stop warming? [well yes, actually, it pretty much did for the last 20 years, but that’s another story…]

Did mankind suddenly see sense and abandon the selfishness, greed and refusal to amend his lifestyle which has caused carbon-dioxide to reach levels unprecedented in the age of humans?

Did the mighty political power of all the nations who met in Paris to secure a climate deal in December 2015 result in an agreement so watertight and effective that the world was saved from the clutches of ManBearPig?

Nope. What happened was that this shyster opportunist – as I reported here, part of his vast fortune comes from his earlier investments in Big Coal – has simply reached the very expensive conclusion that no one gives a damn about the greenies’ imaginary climate problem.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Trump Is Definitely Going to Pull the U.S. out of the UN Paris Climate Agreement

Chip Somodevilla/Getty

President Trump is definitely going to pull the U.S. out of the Paris climate agreement, the head of his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transition team has confirmed.

At a press conference in London – the one where the media delegates’ heads all exploded – Myron Ebell told his appalled audience that Trump would certainly be honouring his campaign promise to pull out of the UN Paris agreement. The fact that incoming Secretary of State Rex Tillerson disagrees with this is, Ebell suggested, an irrelevance.

An apparent contradiction emerged in recent weeks between Trump’s position and that of his incoming secretary of state Rex Tillerson, who said the US will “remain part” of UN climate discussions. When asked about these contrasting positions, Ebell said it is impossible for him to predict the outcome, but “in a disagreement with the president, who do you think will win?”

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Theresa May’s Government Is Still Lying About Wind Energy

For a brief moment – a very brief moment – it looked as if Britain had finally acquired a Prime Minister with the gumption to take on the troughers and con artists of the renewable industry and restore some common sense to our energy economy.

One of the first things Theresa May did on entering Number 10 was to abolish the – entirely unnecessary – Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC); then she appeared to be considering nixing the overpriced and already outdated Hinkley Point C project; then Communities Secretary Sajid Javid made some very positive noises about fracking. All these offered encouraging auguries of even better things to come.

Sadly, it is not to be.

Theresa May is now showing every sign of being almost as deluded, cowardly, and dishonest as her thoroughly useless predecessor Dave “Husky Hugger” Cameron. One of her senior advisers Nick Timothy is known to be sceptical on green energy – he described the Climate Change Act as a “monstrous act of self harm”.

Consider this report on the levelised costs of UK electricity from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. This is the department that absorbed DECC and – in the process, clearly – its army of green zealot civil servants.

If you believe the report, something truly amazing has happened to the bat-chomping, bird-slicing, taxpayer-indulged atrocity that is Britain’s onshore wind industry.

Apparently, it is now producing Britain’s cheapest electricity – cheaper, even than gas power.

image_thumb72

You have to read the small print – as Paul Homewood has done – to realise what a corrupt artefact this is.

The only reason that subsidised, overpriced, environmentally destructive onshore wind works out cheaper is because whichever shyster compiled this faux-economic pile of greenie propaganda has tacked on something called “carbon costs” – and randomly ascribed it a value which suddenly makes cheap, reliable fossil fuel like gas look super expensive.

See for yourself:

image_thumb73

And the dishonesty doesn’t end there. After all, if you’re going to price for externalities like “carbon costs”, then surely it only makes sense to price for countervailing externalities like “avian fauna sliced and diced”, “property values blighted”, “grid destabilised”, “countryside ruined by extra pylons”, “diesel generators kept on standby”, “pensioners dying in fuel poverty” and so on. If those were added, onshore wind energy would look like the environmentally disastrous, economically suicide con trick it actually is.

Remember, this nonsense comes straight from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Theresa May’s Government Is Still Lying About Wind Energy

One of the first things Theresa May did on entering Number 10 was to abolish the – entirely unnecessary – Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC); then she appeared to be considering nixing the overpriced and already outdated Hinkley Point C project; then Communities Secretary Sajid Javid made some very positive noises about fracking. All these offered encouraging auguries of even better things to come.

Sadly, it is not to be.

Theresa May is now showing every sign of being almost as deluded, cowardly, and dishonest as her thoroughly useless predecessor Dave “Husky Hugger” Cameron. One of her senior advisers Nick Timothy is known to be sceptical on green energy – he described the Climate Change Act as a “monstrous act of self harm”.

Consider this report on the levelised costs of UK electricity from the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. This is the department that absorbed DECC and – in the process, clearly – its army of green zealot civil servants.

If you believe the report, something truly amazing has happened to the bat-chomping, bird-slicing, taxpayer-indulged atrocity that is Britain’s onshore wind industry.

Apparently, it is now producing Britain’s cheapest electricity – cheaper, even than gas power.

image_thumb72

You have to read the small print – as Paul Homewood has done – to realise what a corrupt artefact this is.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Trump at NASA: Hasta la Vista Climate Fraud and Muslim Outreach…

NASA’s top climate scientist Gavin Schmidt has warned President-Elect Donald Trump that the planet just won’t stand for having a fully-fledged climate denier in the White House.

Good luck with that one, Gavin. Or “Toast” as we’ll shortly be calling you…

Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), told the Independent:

“The point is simple: the climate is changing and you can try to deny it, you can appoint people who don’t care about it into positions of power, but regardless nature has the last vote on this.”

Unfortunately, Schmidt doesn’t feel so strongly on the issue that he is prepared to offer his resignation:

Asked if he would resign if the Trump administration adopted the most extreme form of climate change denial, Dr Schmidt said this was “an interesting question”. It would not cause him to quit “in and of itself”, he said.

“Government science and things generally go on regardless of the political views of the people at the top,” Dr Schmidt said. “The issue would be if you were being asked to skew your results in any way or asked not to talk about your results. Those would be much more serious issues.”

Schmidt’s principled position on skewing results is somewhat ironic given that skewing results is what he does best.

Last year a German professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert – a retired geologist and data computation expert – accused NASA GISS of having tampered with the raw data so extensively that it had effectively “invented” global warming.

As I reported at Breitbart:

He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

Ewert listed some of the trickery employed by Schmidt and his egregious predecessor James “Death Trains” Hansen to exaggerate the appearance of “global warming”.

• Reducing the annual mean in the early phase.
• Reducing the high values in the first warming phase.
• Increasing individual values during the second warming phase.
• Suppression of the second cooling phase starting in 1995.
• Shortening the early decades of the datasets.
• With the long-term datasets, even the first century was shortened.

This chart, comparing the satellite temperature records with Schmidt’s adjusted version, gives you an idea of the scale of the climate fraud being committed by NASA GISS.

Screen-Shot-2016-11-16-at-10.17.48-PM-768x577

Among Schmidt’s many outrageous adjustments are the ones he made to Iceland’s temperature data sets.

You can see – courtesy of Paul Homewood – what he did to the one at Reykjavik:

station-6

So long and slippery are Gavin’s tentacles that, it would appear, he has somehow persuaded the Iceland Met Office to accept these adjustments, where previously it had rebutted them. You can read the full story at Real Climate Science.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations