climatechangedispatch--2020-04-21--UN Climate Fund Calls Pandemic An ‘Opportunity’ To Remake World

Written by Jack Houghton on .
Posted in Latest news The UN-funded financial arm of the Paris Agreement has labeled the killer coronavirus an “ opportunity ” to raise funds for climate change action and “ relaunch economies on low-emission , climate-resilient trajectories.
” The extraordinary statements have been published in a document by the Green Climate Fund – an international organization with a $ 10.3 billion budget ( US ) .
Australia gifted it $ 200 million ( AUD ) in 2015 but Prime Minister Scott Morrison axed further contributions after questions were raised about funds being sent to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the world .
“ While COVID-19 is causing untold suffering , the international response to this unprecedented health crisis in modern times offers an opportunity to direct finances towards bolstering climate action .
GCF will continue to make critical investments in climate-resilient water resource management , health care facilities , agriculture , and livelihoods – all of which are essential to subduing and overcoming the pandemic , ” the organization wrote in an official public update .
“ Similarly , we will step up our efforts to catalyze green investment to relaunch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The Green Climate Fund is confident that only a united approach – bringing together determined efforts and innovation – will provide lasting solutions to both the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change.
” The Green Climate Fund went on to suggest that climate change was a threat comparable to COVID-19 , which has killed 165,000 people , infected millions more and ravaged global economies .
“ The COVID-19 pandemic and the global response required to stem it shows the importance of acting together to solve unparalleled threats to people and our planet , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far-reaching impacts of COVID-19 are a stark reminder of the catastrophic implications the world faces if we don ’ t. ” A Sky News special investigation last year revealed the GCF squandered $ 3.7 million flying staff around the world for climate change conferences .
The bureaucrats that run the GFC were paid $ 65 million in wages – a figure that has been steadily ballooning each year .
It can also now be revealed that the fund sent $ 157.5 million ( AUD ) to China in December despite the country planning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of CO2 by 2030 .
China escaped having to pay a cent towards the climate change fund by hanging on to its “ developing nation ” status even though it is a global superpower with the world ’ s second-largest economy .
China ’ s failure to contribute to the fund led to US President Donald Trump withdrawing from the deal , clawing back billions .
However , funds Australians contributed still in part went towards financing a major antistructure project in Shandong – one of the biggest polluting cities in the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( US ) .
The Green Climate Fund will finance “ low carbon transport with supporting investments in new energy vehicles and bus rapid transit green corridors ” in the major metropolis .

Written by Jack Houghton on Apr 21, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
The UN-funded financial arm of the Paris Agreement has labeled the killer coronavirus an “opportunity” to raise funds for climate change action and “relaunch economies on low-emission, climate-resilient trajectories.”
The extraordinary statements have been published in a document by the Green Climate Fund – an international organization with a $10.3 billion budget (US).
Australia gifted it $200 million (AUD) in 2015 but Prime Minister Scott Morrison axed further contributions after questions were raised about funds being sent to China, the single largest CO2 emitter in the world.
“While COVID-19 is causing untold suffering, the international response to this unprecedented health crisis in modern times offers an opportunity to direct finances towards bolstering climate action. GCF will continue to make critical investments in climate-resilient water resource management, health care facilities, agriculture, and livelihoods – all of which are essential to subduing and overcoming the pandemic,” the organization wrote in an official public update.
“Similarly, we will step up our efforts to catalyze green investment to relaunch economies on low-emission, climate-resilient trajectories.
“The Green Climate Fund is confident that only a united approach – bringing together determined efforts and innovation – will provide lasting solutions to both the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change.”
The Green Climate Fund went on to suggest that climate change was a threat comparable to COVID-19, which has killed 165,000 people, infected millions more and ravaged global economies.
“The COVID-19 pandemic and the global response required to stem it shows the importance of acting together to solve unparalleled threats to people and our planet,” the GCF said.
“The far-reaching impacts of COVID-19 are a stark reminder of the catastrophic implications the world faces if we don’t.”
A Sky News special investigation last year revealed the GCF squandered $3.7 million flying staff around the world for climate change conferences.
The bureaucrats that run the GFC were paid $65 million in wages – a figure that has been steadily ballooning each year.
It can also now be revealed that the fund sent $157.5 million (AUD) to China in December despite the country planning on increasing emissions by several thousand megatonnes of CO2 by 2030.
China escaped having to pay a cent towards the climate change fund by hanging on to its “developing nation” status even though it is a global superpower with the world’s second-largest economy.
China’s failure to contribute to the fund led to US President Donald Trump withdrawing from the deal, clawing back billions.
However, funds Australians contributed still in part went towards financing a major antistructure project in Shandong – one of the biggest polluting cities in the world that has a $1.1 trillion GDP (US).
The Green Climate Fund will finance “low carbon transport with supporting investments in new energy vehicles and bus rapid transit green corridors” in the major metropolis.
Read more at Sky News
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-21--NBC Frets That Eco-Benefits Of Pandemic Won’t Last Post-Crisis

Written by Kyle Drennen on .
Posted in Latest news , Videos On Saturday , NBC ’ s Today show worried that all of the “ environmental benefits ” of the coronavirus pandemic “ may not last ” after the crisis is over .
While devoting a full report to touting “ cleaner air and cleaner water ” due to less human activity amid global economic shutdowns , the coverage cautioned that it could all be lost “ if we return to business as usual.
” “ With billions of people across the globe staying put , the environment is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wild animals reclaiming parts of their natural habitat , ” co-host Peter Alexander announced at the top of the segment .
“ You know , here in New York and in many other cities around the world , even underneath the mask , if you take a deep breath , you can tell the air is cleaner and clearer , ” chief environmental affairs correspondent Anne Thompson proclaimed .
The headline on screen cheered : “ Back to Nature ; Stay-at-Home Measures Result in Environmental Benefits.
” Thompson gushed : “ From the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great cities , the virus shut down dramatically illustrating our impact on the planet.
” Stanford University Professor Marshall Burke explained : “ When we run our economies less , we pollute the environment less .
And now we have seen pretty dramatic improvements in things like air quality around the world.
” “ Is this a real-time experiment on our impact on the environment ?
” Thompson wondered .
Marshall agreed that it was , but also acknowledged the dire circumstances : “ It is a real-time experiment .
I don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we wanted to run .
This is not the way to clean up our environment.
” Even so , the reporter kept marveling : However , even Thompson pointed out : “ Improvements coming at a horrific economic cost.
” She then turned to another environmentalist to push the idea of some changes becoming permanent and take a jab at President Trump as well : Thompson concluded : “ Adapting to protect ourselves and the planet.
” Following her taped report , she reminded Alexander : At the beginning of the month , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberal media colleagues in pushing a “ silver lining ” to the pandemic – pollution being “ way down.
” The press never let a crisis go to waste or keep them from promoting a liberal climate change agenda .

Written by Kyle Drennen on Apr 21, 2020 . Posted in Latest news, Videos
On Saturday, NBC’s Today show worried that all of the “environmental benefits” of the coronavirus pandemic “may not last” after the crisis is over.
While devoting a full report to touting “cleaner air and cleaner water” due to less human activity amid global economic shutdowns, the coverage cautioned that it could all be lost “if we return to business as usual.”
“With billions of people across the globe staying put, the environment is now thriving, with cleaner air and wild animals reclaiming parts of their natural habitat,” co-host Peter Alexander announced at the top of the segment.
“You know, here in New York and in many other cities around the world, even underneath the mask, if you take a deep breath, you can tell the air is cleaner and clearer,” chief environmental affairs correspondent Anne Thompson proclaimed.
The headline on screen cheered: “Back to Nature; Stay-at-Home Measures Result in Environmental Benefits.”
Thompson gushed: “From the great outdoors to the world’s great cities, the virus shut down dramatically illustrating our impact on the planet.”
Stanford University Professor Marshall Burke explained: “When we run our economies less, we pollute the environment less. And now we have seen pretty dramatic improvements in things like air quality around the world.”
“Is this a real-time experiment on our impact on the environment?” Thompson wondered.
Marshall agreed that it was, but also acknowledged the dire circumstances: “It is a real-time experiment. I don’t think it’s an experiment we wanted to run. This is not the way to clean up our environment.”
Even so, the reporter kept marveling:
Still, with fewer cars, planes and factories, the change is stunning. The murky waters of Venice’s famous canals now clear. In Wuhan, China, according to NASA, air quality improved 30%, almost 50% in Milan, Italy. Skies clearer in L.A., the Himalayas finally visible.
However, even Thompson pointed out: “Improvements coming at a horrific economic cost.”
She then turned to another environmentalist to push the idea of some changes becoming permanent and take a jab at President Trump as well:
“Climate scientist Radley Horton warns the environmental benefits may not last if we return to business as usual, especially now with the Trump administration’s rollback of pollution controls, including vehicle mileage standards and mercury and soot emissions.”
Radley proposed:
“As we go forward, maybe we’ll see more people only commute into work four days a week instead of five. Maybe we’ll see people not flying as often to conferences and instead, you know, relying more on video conferences.”
Thompson concluded: “Adapting to protect ourselves and the planet.”
Following her taped report, she reminded Alexander:
“Now, all this cleaner air and cleaner water comes just in time for the 50th anniversary of Earth Day, which will be celebrated next Wednesday.”
At the beginning of the month, NBC weatherman Al Roker joined numerous other liberal media colleagues in pushing a “silver lining” to the pandemic – pollution being “way down.”
The press never let a crisis go to waste or keep them from promoting a liberal climate change agenda.
Read rest at NewsBusters
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-21--Water Scarcity Lessens As Natural Gas Plants Proliferate

Written by Matthew Kandrach on .
Posted in Latest news Driven by opposition to fossil fuels , some environmental groups want a national ban on fracking .
The more I think about it , the nuttier it seems to me .
What they overlook is the role natural gas not only plays in carbon mitigation but in saving scarce water resources .
Cooling systems in natural gas plants use much less water than those in coal plants .
Since 2010 , thanks in large part to an abundance of cheap natural gas produced from a combination of fracking and horizontal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have closed , replaced primarily by combined-cycle natural gas plants .
As plants shut down , coal mines also closed .
Today , much less water is being used for coal mining , coal washing , and for slurry pipes that sometimes transport the coal .
That adds up to substantial savings since 40 % of all water used in the United States currently goes to cooling thermoelectric power plants , which is more than all the water used for farm irrigation .
According to a Duke University study , for every megawatt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instead of coal , the amount of water withdrawn from rivers and groundwater is reduced by 10,500 gallons , the equivalent of 100-day water supply for a typical American household .
What ’ s more , if all coal plants are converted to natural gas , annual water savings will reach 12,250 billion gallons — that ’ s 260 % of current annual industrial water use .
Potentially , the savings would be even greater if technologies for capture and storing carbon emissions from coal plants are eventually instituted .
Carbon capture and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and would increase consumption by an estimated 45 % to 85 % , depending on the scale-up of such technology .
Given that water is fast becoming a scarce commodity in the Southwest and other regions , the shutdown of coal plants is freeing up suddenly abundant supplies of water in places that desperately need it .
That means more water is going to households and businesses , farming and ranching , and recreation .
And instead of being pumped out , some of the groundwater is being left in place to replenish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power is only picking up steam .
Morgan Stanley projects that coal-fired electricity will decline from 27 % of the total US power mix in 2018 to just 8 % by 2030 .
That has important implications for emissions reduction efforts but it also has tremendous implications for our strained water supply .
Scientists say that more than one-third of the United States will face higher risks of water shortages by mid-century as a result of economic and demographic factors .
Fortunately , the nation ’ s power plants have used less water @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large part to the transition to natural gas .
According to a report by the Energy Information Administration ( EIA ) , withdrawals by thermoelectric power plants totaled 52.8 trillion gallons in 2017 , continuing a steady decline that began in 2014 .
In addition , water intensity of U.S. power generation — the average amount of water withdrawn per unit of total net electricity generated — has fallen to 13 gallons per kilowatt-hour , nearly a 14 % decrease since 2014 .
EIA attributes the decline to the transition to natural gas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality check in the national debate over fossil fuels , and our transition to newer , cleaner , and more efficient technologies .
It brings into sharp focus the most urgent challenge : How will the United States replace fossil fuels ?
Can it be done fast enough , cheaply enough and on a sufficient scale without shale gas ?
And will the dramatic gains in water conservation continue if fracking is curtailed ?
Not if it means relying solely on solar and wind .
For all the hoopla about renewables , subsidized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 10 % of our electricity needs .
In contrast , natural gas supplies 40 % of the nation ’ s electricity , up from 21 % in 2010 .
Moreover , fracking itself provides a pathway for the renewables that are championed by its adversaries , since cheap natural gas was needed as a backup fuel on days when solar and wind power were in short supply .
Understanding this reality , we must continue to resist efforts by some politicians to ban fracking .
Environmentalists keep insisting that fracking is bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tough to maintain as the reality emerges that even in the face of opposition , fracking is tremendously popular .
Fracking generates revenue for landowners and governments at all levels .
Consumers save dollars when gas supplies are plentiful and cheap .
And with energy consumption expected to grow by more than half over the next 30 years , the odds seem low that we will run out of water .

Written by Matthew Kandrach on Apr 21, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Driven by opposition to fossil fuels, some environmental groups want a national ban on fracking. The more I think about it, the nuttier it seems to me.
What they overlook is the role natural gas not only plays in carbon mitigation but in saving scarce water resources. Cooling systems in natural gas plants use much less water than those in coal plants.
Since 2010, thanks in large part to an abundance of cheap natural gas produced from a combination of fracking and horizontal drilling, more than 300 coal plants have closed, replaced primarily by combined-cycle natural gas plants.
As plants shut down, coal mines also closed. Today, much less water is being used for coal mining, coal washing, and for slurry pipes that sometimes transport the coal.
That adds up to substantial savings since 40% of all water used in the United States currently goes to cooling thermoelectric power plants, which is more than all the water used for farm irrigation.
According to a Duke University study, for every megawatt of electricity produced from using natural gas instead of coal, the amount of water withdrawn from rivers and groundwater is reduced by 10,500 gallons, the equivalent of 100-day water supply for a typical American household.
What’s more, if all coal plants are converted to natural gas, annual water savings will reach 12,250 billion gallons — that’s 260% of current annual industrial water use.
Potentially, the savings would be even greater if technologies for capture and storing carbon emissions from coal plants are eventually instituted.
Carbon capture and storage requires large volumes of additional water and would increase consumption by an estimated 45% to 85%, depending on the scale-up of such technology.
Given that water is fast becoming a scarce commodity in the Southwest and other regions, the shutdown of coal plants is freeing up suddenly abundant supplies of water in places that desperately need it.
That means more water is going to households and businesses, farming and ranching, and recreation. And instead of being pumped out, some of the groundwater is being left in place to replenish aquifers.
The transition away from coal power is only picking up steam. Morgan Stanley projects that coal-fired electricity will decline from 27% of the total US power mix in 2018 to just 8% by 2030.
That has important implications for emissions reduction efforts but it also has tremendous implications for our strained water supply.
Scientists say that more than one-third of the United States will face higher risks of water shortages by mid-century as a result of economic and demographic factors.
Fortunately, the nation’s power plants have used less water every year since 2014, due in large part to the transition to natural gas.
According to a report by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), withdrawals by thermoelectric power plants totaled 52.8 trillion gallons in 2017, continuing a steady decline that began in 2014.
In addition, water intensity of U.S. power generation — the average amount of water withdrawn per unit of total net electricity generated — has fallen to 13 gallons per kilowatt-hour, nearly a 14% decrease since 2014.
EIA attributes the decline to the transition to natural gas.
This is an opportunity for a reality check in the national debate over fossil fuels, and our transition to newer, cleaner, and more efficient technologies.
It brings into sharp focus the most urgent challenge: How will the United States replace fossil fuels? Can it be done fast enough, cheaply enough and on a sufficient scale without shale gas?
And will the dramatic gains in water conservation continue if fracking is curtailed? Not if it means relying solely on solar and wind.
For all the hoopla about renewables, subsidized solar and wind power combined meet less than 10% of our electricity needs. In contrast, natural gas supplies 40% of the nation’s electricity, up from 21% in 2010.
Moreover, fracking itself provides a pathway for the renewables that are championed by its adversaries, since cheap natural gas was needed as a backup fuel on days when solar and wind power were in short supply.
Understanding this reality, we must continue to resist efforts by some politicians to ban fracking. Environmentalists keep insisting that fracking is bad for the public.
That position is tough to maintain as the reality emerges that even in the face of opposition, fracking is tremendously popular.
Fracking generates revenue for landowners and governments at all levels. Consumers save dollars when gas supplies are plentiful and cheap.
And with energy consumption expected to grow by more than half over the next 30 years, the odds seem low that we will run out of water.
Read more at RealClearEnergy
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-21--AOC Praises Oil Crash In Now-Deleted Tweet; Plugs Green Investment

Written by Gregg Re on .
Posted in Latest news Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , D-N.Y. , tweeted — then quickly deleted — a celebration of the news that U.S. equity markets crashed on Monday , with oil prices turning negative for the first time in history .
The resulting social media flareup highlighted the unprecedented stakes of the current economic crisis heading into the 2020 presidential election and underscored Republican complaints that their rivals were looking for ways to use the moment for political gain .
“ You absolutely love to see it , ” Ocasio-Cortez , a self-described “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She was responding to a post which stated : “ Oil prices now at ‘ negative values , ’ meaning oil producers have to pay people to take it off their hands and store it because when demand plunges ( like now ) , that is less expensive for them than building more storage and/or shutting wells down.
” “ This along with record low-interest rates means it ’ s the right time for a worker-led , mass investment in green infrastructure to save our planet .
cough , ” Ocasio-Cortez continued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Casca responded “ like some kind of new deal ?
” , Ocasio-Cortez cheerfully replied , “ Great idea !
” Ocasio-Cortez has pushed to radically restructure the U.S. economy with what progressives call a “ Green New Deal , ” which could cost as much as $ 93 trillion , according to a study co-authored by the former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office .
Ocasio-Cortez ’ s former chief of staff has admitted the Green New Deal was intended to remake the economy , not avert climate change .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , writing : “ This snapshot is being acknowledged as a turning point in the climate movement .
Fossil fuels are in long-term structural decline .
This along w/low-interest rates means it ‘ s the right time to create millions of jobs transitioning to renewable and clean energy .
A key opportunity.
” Throughout the day , Ocasio-Cortez has also reposted various messages essentially saying the oil crash presents an opportunity for environmentalists .
“ Openly celebrating the economic destruction of families and communities because it fits a political narrative is unacceptable and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Rep. Kelly Armstrong , R-N.D. “ People ’ s jobs are evaporating .
Lives are being ruined in real-time .
North Dakota companies that have taken decades to build have been destroyed in hours .
Any public official that loves to see this does not deserve to hold office.
” Added Rep. Jodey Arrington , R-Texas : “ I don ’ t ‘ love to see ’ oil & gas workers & their rural communities suffering as a result of this devastating price collapse , @ AOC .
Places like West @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the oil patch power the bright lights of NYC… including the hospitals !
” Noah Rothman , an associate editor of Commentary Magazine , responded to Ocasio-Cortez with a link to his recent column : “ These unbearable conditions may be demanded of a nation struggling to contain a pandemic , but an engineered recession is precisely what the Green New Deal ’ s proponents envision , ” Rothman wrote .
He asserted that the “ mandatory substitution of one set of economic activities with another—or , in some instances , replacing conventional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the heart of the progressive project.
” “ My cousin ’ s husband was laid off from his oil field job in Western Texas even before today ’ s downturn , ” responded The Daily Caller ’ s Chuck Ross .
“ They have 3 kids .
She has cancer for the second time in her life , prognosis unclear .
So no , you don ’ t ‘ absolutely love to see it . '
” Others were more scathing , with commentator Stephen Miller writing to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she ’ s saying the quiet part out loud again.
” “ You only need thousands of people dead and millions of people unemployed to enact your vision , which is basically what we ’ ve been saying all along , ” Miller went on , taking aim at Ocasio-Cortez .
“ Perhaps someone in the journalism industry would care to ask the presumptive Democratic nominee if he agrees that now is the time to push a Green New Deal and if he also ‘ loves to see ’ millions of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ added : “ ‘ Now that global pandemic has killed thousands and left millions unemployed , we can finally get what we want ’ is not the genius take she or her Instagram stans think it is , which is why you don ’ t see the Dem nominee jumping into the boat.
” “ After deleting that tweet , I would love to see Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , who loves to remind people she has an econ degree , explain contango and oil contracts to the rest of us who don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s suggesting , ” wrote RealClearInvestigations ’ Mark Hemingway .
T. Becket Adams , the senior commentary writer for the Washington Examiner , responded , “ Yeah , no .
you don ’ t get to memory hole that one , @ AOC.
” “ Make no mistake : This is the goal of the Democrats so-called ‘ Green New Deal , ' ” said GOP national spokeswoman Elizabeth Harrington .
“ They would be happy to sacrifice millions upon millions of good-paying jobs at the altar for their radical anti-energy agenda.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first time on Monday as demand for energy collapses amid the coronavirus pandemic and traders sought to avoid owning crude with nowhere to store it .
A separate provision worth $ 60 billion ( including $ 50 billion in loans and $ 10 billion in grants ) would be allocated to economic disaster loans .
It also included : $ 75 billion for hospitals and $ 25 billion for coronavirus testing .
The total of the package would be north of $ 470 billion .
Ocasio-Cortez has said she ’ ll oppose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it doesn ’ t do enough for illegal immigrants , among others .
It ’ s wrong for Congress to pass an incomplete package and then “ peace out ” for several weeks , she remarked .
House Democrats were on a caucus-wide conference call late Monday , discussing the next steps .
Progressives have some reservations with some provisions in the current bill framework – as does the Congressional Black Caucus .
Many Democrats are still concerned by the lack of money for state and local governments in the planned bill .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be reluctant to tackle other measures related to coronavirus , considering the staggering price tag of the measures already in the queue .
Fox News is told that calculus could change if lawmakers believe they now need to respond to the oil market cratering to its historic low .

Written by Gregg Re on Apr 21, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted — then quickly deleted — a celebration of the news that U.S. equity markets crashed on Monday, with oil prices turning negative for the first time in history.
The resulting social media flareup highlighted the unprecedented stakes of the current economic crisis heading into the 2020 presidential election and underscored Republican complaints that their rivals were looking for ways to use the moment for political gain.
“You absolutely love to see it,” Ocasio-Cortez, a self-described “democratic socialist,” wrote on Twitter.
She was responding to a post which stated: “Oil prices now at ‘negative values,’ meaning oil producers have to pay people to take it off their hands and store it because when demand plunges (like now), that is less expensive for them than building more storage and/or shutting wells down.”
“This along with record low-interest rates means it’s the right time for a worker-led, mass investment in green infrastructure to save our planet. cough,” Ocasio-Cortez continued.
When Bernie Sanders communications director Mike Casca responded “like some kind of new deal?”, Ocasio-Cortez cheerfully replied, “Great idea!”
Ocasio-Cortez has pushed to radically restructure the U.S. economy with what progressives call a “Green New Deal,” which could cost as much as $93 trillion, according to a study co-authored by the former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
Ocasio-Cortez’s former chief of staff has admitted the Green New Deal was intended to remake the economy, not avert climate change.
VIEW THE ARCHIVED VERSION OF AOC’S TWEET
She deleted it, but here it is. pic.twitter.com/smePUtFFrK — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) April 20, 2020
After deleting her post, Ocasio-Cortez tried again, writing: “This snapshot is being acknowledged as a turning point in the climate movement. Fossil fuels are in long-term structural decline. This along w/low-interest rates means it‘s the right time to create millions of jobs transitioning to renewable and clean energy. A key opportunity.”
Throughout the day, Ocasio-Cortez has also reposted various messages essentially saying the oil crash presents an opportunity for environmentalists.
“Openly celebrating the economic destruction of families and communities because it fits a political narrative is unacceptable and unbecoming of a member of Congress,” said Rep. Kelly Armstrong, R-N.D.
“People’s jobs are evaporating. Lives are being ruined in real-time. North Dakota companies that have taken decades to build have been destroyed in hours. Any public official that loves to see this does not deserve to hold office.”
Added Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas: “I don’t ‘love to see’ oil & gas workers & their rural communities suffering as a result of this devastating price collapse, @AOC. Places like West Texas & hard-working men & women in the oil patch power the bright lights of NYC… including the hospitals!”
Noah Rothman, an associate editor of Commentary Magazine, responded to Ocasio-Cortez with a link to his recent column: “These unbearable conditions may be demanded of a nation struggling to contain a pandemic, but an engineered recession is precisely what the Green New Deal’s proponents envision,” Rothman wrote.
He asserted that the “mandatory substitution of one set of economic activities with another—or, in some instances, replacing conventional economic activity with nothing at all—is increasingly at the heart of the progressive project.”
“My cousin’s husband was laid off from his oil field job in Western Texas even before today’s downturn,” responded The Daily Caller’s Chuck Ross. “They have 3 kids. She has cancer for the second time in her life, prognosis unclear. So no, you don’t ‘absolutely love to see it.'”
Others were more scathing, with commentator Stephen Miller writing to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.: “@SpeakerPelosi Mom, she’s saying the quiet part out loud again.”
“You only need thousands of people dead and millions of people unemployed to enact your vision, which is basically what we’ve been saying all along,” Miller went on, taking aim at Ocasio-Cortez.
“Perhaps someone in the journalism industry would care to ask the presumptive Democratic nominee if he agrees that now is the time to push a Green New Deal and if he also ‘loves to see’ millions of people laid off from their jobs.”
Miller added: “‘Now that global pandemic has killed thousands and left millions unemployed, we can finally get what we want’ is not the genius take she or her Instagram stans think it is, which is why you don’t see the Dem nominee jumping into the boat.”
After deleting that tweet, I would love to see Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who loves to remind people she has an econ degree, explain contango and oil contracts to the rest of us who don’t see the logic in what she’s suggesting. — Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) April 20, 2020
“After deleting that tweet, I would love to see Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who loves to remind people she has an econ degree, explain contango and oil contracts to the rest of us who don’t see the logic in what she’s suggesting,” wrote RealClearInvestigations’ Mark Hemingway.
T. Becket Adams, the senior commentary writer for the Washington Examiner, responded, “Yeah, no. you don’t get to memory hole that one, @AOC.”
“Make no mistake: This is the goal of the Democrats so-called ‘Green New Deal,'” said GOP national spokeswoman Elizabeth Harrington. “They would be happy to sacrifice millions upon millions of good-paying jobs at the altar for their radical anti-energy agenda.”
Oil futures plunged below zero for the first time on Monday as demand for energy collapses amid the coronavirus pandemic and traders sought to avoid owning crude with nowhere to store it.
…snip…
A separate provision worth $60 billion (including $50 billion in loans and $10 billion in grants) would be allocated to economic disaster loans.
It also included: $75 billion for hospitals and $25 billion for coronavirus testing. The total of the package would be north of $470 billion.
Ocasio-Cortez has said she’ll oppose the plan in its current form because it doesn’t do enough for illegal immigrants, among others. It’s wrong for Congress to pass an incomplete package and then “peace out” for several weeks, she remarked.
House Democrats were on a caucus-wide conference call late Monday, discussing the next steps. Progressives have some reservations with some provisions in the current bill framework – as does the Congressional Black Caucus.
Many Democrats are still concerned by the lack of money for state and local governments in the planned bill.
And, some Republicans are signaling they may be reluctant to tackle other measures related to coronavirus, considering the staggering price tag of the measures already in the queue.
Fox News is told that calculus could change if lawmakers believe they now need to respond to the oil market cratering to its historic low.
Read rest at Fox News
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--Paper: The Systemic Misuse Of Extreme Scenarios In Climate Science

Written by Roger Pielke Jr. And Justin Ritchie on .
Posted in Latest news Climate science research and assessments have misused scenarios for more than a decade .
Symptoms of this misuse include the treatment of an unrealistic , extreme scenario as the world ’ s most likely future in the absence of climate policy and the illogical comparison of climate projections across inconsistent global development trajectories .
( a ) competing demands for scenarios from users in diverse academic disciplines that ultimately conflated exploratory and policy-relevant pathways , ( b ) the evolving role of the Intergovernmental Panel on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mandate from literature assessment to literature coordination , ( c ) unforeseen consequences of employing a nuanced temporary approach to scenario development , ( d ) maintaining research practices that normalize careless use of scenarios in a vacuum of plausibility , and ( e ) the inherent complexity and technicality of scenarios in model-based research and in support of [ climate ] policy .
As a consequence , the climate research community is presently off-track .
Attempts to address scenario misuse within the community have thus far not worked .
The result has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misleading perspectives on future climate change and climate policy .
Until reform is implemented , we can expect the production of such perspectives to continue .
However , because many aspects of climate change discourse are contingent on scenarios , there is considerable momentum that will make such a course correction difficult and contested – even as efforts to improve scenarios have informed research that will be included in the IPCC 6th Assessment .

Written by Roger Pielke Jr. And Justin Ritchie on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Climate science research and assessments have misused scenarios for more than a decade.
Symptoms of this misuse include the treatment of an unrealistic, extreme scenario as the world’s most likely future in the absence of climate policy and the illogical comparison of climate projections across inconsistent global development trajectories.
Reasons why this misuse arose include:
(a) competing demands for scenarios from users in diverse academic disciplines that ultimately conflated exploratory and policy-relevant pathways,
(b) the evolving role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – which effectively extended its mandate from literature assessment to literature coordination,
(c) unforeseen consequences of employing a nuanced temporary approach to scenario development,
(d) maintaining research practices that normalize careless use of scenarios in a vacuum of plausibility, and
(e) the inherent complexity and technicality of scenarios in model-based research and in support of [climate] policy.
As a consequence, the climate research community is presently off-track. Attempts to address scenario misuse within the community have thus far not worked.
The result has been the widespread production of myopic or misleading perspectives on future climate change and climate policy.
Until reform is implemented, we can expect the production of such perspectives to continue.
However, because many aspects of climate change discourse are contingent on scenarios, there is considerable momentum that will make such a course correction difficult and contested – even as efforts to improve scenarios have informed research that will be included in the IPCC 6th Assessment.
Read the abstract here
Download full paper (PDF)
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--Alarmists Struggle To Keep Climate Hysteria Alive On Earth Day

Written by Thomas D. Williams , Ph.D. on .
Posted in Latest news Earth Day 2020 has arrived to find environmental groups struggling to keep people focused on the alleged climate crisis now that the coronavirus pandemic has stolen their limelight .
“ Climate change is a moral , religious and justice issue , ” proclaims the official Earth Day website as the yearly commemoration celebrates its 50th birthday on April 22 in the absence of fanfare or large public gatherings .
Whereas in 1970 Earth Day focused on clean air , land , and water , it has gradually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carbon dioxide emissions as these topics have taken center stage among environmentalists .
The Paris Climate Agreement was signed by over 120 countries on Earth Day 2016 , and the 27-page text conspicuously omitted any reference to the problem of pollution , despite the fact that millions die every year from air pollution alone .
Earth Day has also taken on a decidedly more religious tone as organizers have perceived the power of organized religion to motivate people to climate change action .
The 50th World Earth Day has been dedicated to Pope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anniversary of his encyclical letter on the environment , Laudato sí , which was released on May 24 , 2015 .
“ We are honored by the commitment ” that the pope puts “ into uniting people around the importance of the Earth at this very important time , ” said Denis Hayes , the founder of Earth Day , and Kathleen Rogers , president of the Earth Day Network .
“ His encyclical Laudato Sí underlines the powerful relationship each of us has with our one Planet.
” “ The anniversary has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic , ” laments Vatican News , “ which now sees tens of thousands of victims , hundreds of thousands of sick people at every latitude of the world and billions of people of all ages and social status at risk of contagion , forced into new measures of isolation and social distancing.
” COP26 , the next United Nations Climate Change Conference , was originally scheduled to be held in Glasgow , Scotland from November 9 to 20 , 2020 under the presidency of the UK government , but because of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nonetheless , the COP26 Twitter account has continued urging people not to forget the climate crisis in the midst of other health concerns .
“ While coronavirus may force us to keep our distance , tackling Climate Change must remain a top priority , ” the group tweeted Wednesday .
Similarly , the International Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) has insisted on the gravity of the climate crisis even as people struggle to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic .
“ Earth Day is here !
We ’ re all looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but let ’ s not forget that Climate Change is still one of our greatest challenges , ” the organization stated Wednesday on Twitter .
For its part , the Guardian newspaper , the flagship for climate alarmism in the UK , acknowledged that postponing COP26 was the right step to take when the world is grappling with the coronavirus while insisting that “ we should not let the momentum of what had been hailed as a ‘ super year ’ for the environment be lost .
”

Written by Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Earth Day 2020 has arrived to find environmental groups struggling to keep people focused on the alleged climate crisis now that the coronavirus pandemic has stolen their limelight.
“Climate change is a moral, religious and justice issue,” proclaims the official Earth Day website as the yearly commemoration celebrates its 50th birthday on April 22 in the absence of fanfare or large public gatherings.
Whereas in 1970 Earth Day focused on clean air, land, and water, it has gradually shifted its attention to global warming and carbon dioxide emissions as these topics have taken center stage among environmentalists.
The Paris Climate Agreement was signed by over 120 countries on Earth Day 2016, and the 27-page text conspicuously omitted any reference to the problem of pollution, despite the fact that millions die every year from air pollution alone.
Earth Day has also taken on a decidedly more religious tone as organizers have perceived the power of organized religion to motivate people to climate change action.
The 50th World Earth Day has been dedicated to Pope Francis and roughly coincides with the fifth anniversary of his encyclical letter on the environment, Laudato sí, which was released on May 24, 2015.
“We are honored by the commitment” that the pope puts “into uniting people around the importance of the Earth at this very important time,” said Denis Hayes, the founder of Earth Day, and Kathleen Rogers, president of the Earth Day Network. “His encyclical Laudato Sí underlines the powerful relationship each of us has with our one Planet.”
“The anniversary has been devastated this year by the COVID-19 pandemic,” laments Vatican News, “which now sees tens of thousands of victims, hundreds of thousands of sick people at every latitude of the world and billions of people of all ages and social status at risk of contagion, forced into new measures of isolation and social distancing.”
COP26, the next United Nations Climate Change Conference, was originally scheduled to be held in Glasgow, Scotland from November 9 to 20, 2020 under the presidency of the UK government, but because of the coronavirus lockdown has been postponed until 2021.
Nonetheless, the COP26 Twitter account has continued urging people not to forget the climate crisis in the midst of other health concerns.
“While coronavirus may force us to keep our distance, tackling Climate Change must remain a top priority,” the group tweeted Wednesday.
💚 Happy 50th Birthday Earth Day 💚 While #coronavirus may force us to keep our distance, tackling #ClimateChange must remain a top priority. No matter where you are, you can make a difference. Together, we can protect the Earth. 🤝🌍@EarthDayNetwork | #COP26 | #EarthDay pic.twitter.com/jcLmtKchT5 — COP26 (@COP26) April 22, 2020
Similarly, the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has insisted on the gravity of the climate crisis even as people struggle to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Earth Day is here! We’re all looking at the world from a different perspective, but let’s not forget that Climate Change is still one of our greatest challenges,” the organization stated Wednesday on Twitter.
For its part, the Guardian newspaper, the flagship for climate alarmism in the UK, acknowledged that postponing COP26 was the right step to take when the world is grappling with the coronavirus while insisting that “we should not let the momentum of what had been hailed as a ‘super year’ for the environment be lost.”
Read rest at Breitbart
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--Let’s Celebrate Earth Day With A Slice Of Humble Pie

Written by Patrick Michaels on .
Posted in Latest news April 22 marks the 50th Earth Day — born in the height of fears of The Population Bomb , global famine , miasmatic air , and the rapid decline of the West into post-civilizational chaos .
How did that all work out ?
The dire predictions were wrong , but there is one lasting legacy : on December 2 , 1970 , the Environmental Protection Agency was born .
It was purposefully and politically re-cobbled from other parts of the federal bureaucracy by Richard Nixon into one central agency granted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aside , there were some serious air-quality problems , especially in urban airsheds ; and the EPA along with the states did a pretty good job of cleaning things up .
That was low-hanging fruit the agency could easily pick off .
A much larger , less manageable problem was acid rain .
While rainfall is naturally a bit acidic , the addition of sulfur and nitrogen oxides , mainly from the combustion of coal , clearly increases acidity .
Air quality around coal-fired power plants was pretty bad , but local solutions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those days was “ the solution to pollution is dilution , ” so power plant chimneys moved skyward .
The clustering of generation facilities along major waterways like the Ohio River , where they had easy access to coal , resulted in large regions of the East being subjected to increasingly acid precipitation as the new plants injected sulfate aerosols high enough in the atmosphere to travel hundreds , even thousands of miles .
Acid rain became a regional problem , both in the eastern United States and Europe .
Our power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coals and to capture the sulfates with scrubbers .
Environmentalists and academics predicted horrible things would happen to extensive forests , but a comprehensive review published in 2004 in the journal Environmental Science and Policy concluded that “ ( f ) ortunately , the dramatic forest dieback feared by some scientists in the 1980s never materialized.
” In fact , it was ultimately discovered that in general ( there are exceptions in the highly polluted east ) , European forests grew more luxuriously , thanks to fertilization from nitrogen compounds emitted during coal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of environmental concerns spawned by the first Earth Day grew increasingly large , culminating with global warming .
EPA ’ s reach increased proportionately , justified by the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA that granted the agency the power to regulate carbon dioxide if it deemed the gas “ endangered ” human health and welfare .
The agency issued its official finding of endangerment in 2009 .
EPA ’ s sole metric to determine future endangerment consists of complicated computer models for future climate .
Anyone who is watching the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t ? )
knows that future prospects are completely dependent upon very fuzzy and plastic assumptions .
How effectively would people “ socially isolate ?
” No one really knows .
How many “ silent ” cases are out there contributing to undetected herd immunity ?
It ’ s now known that the climate models are “ with one notable exception ” totally incapable of modeling the three-dimensional structure of climate change in the Earth ’ s vast tropics .
The one model that works predicts less warming than any other , warming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justify “ endangerment.
” It ’ s also recently been found that dreaded sea-level rise on the East Coast is pretty much the same as it is now as it was some three centuries ago , or long before the Industrial Revolution and the initiation of our ability to significantly modify the global atmosphere .
And it is also now clear from satellite data that our planet is rapidly becoming greener , thanks to the fertilizing effects of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide .
The effect about 10 times larger than we see from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In observance of the 50th anniversary of Earth Day and the subsequent founding of the EPA , it would be great if the agency “ for once ” ate some humble pie and reversed its finding of human endangerment from carbon dioxide .
That would really be cause for an Earth Day celebration !
Patrick J. Michaels is with the Competitive Enterprise Institute and is the co-author of “ Scientocracy : The Tangled Web of Public Science and Public Policy .
”

Written by Patrick Michaels on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
April 22 marks the 50th Earth Day — born in the height of fears of The Population Bomb, global famine, miasmatic air, and the rapid decline of the West into post-civilizational chaos.
How did that all work out? The dire predictions were wrong, but there is one lasting legacy: on December 2, 1970, the Environmental Protection Agency was born.
It was purposefully and politically re-cobbled from other parts of the federal bureaucracy by Richard Nixon into one central agency granted eternal life in Washington.
Failed predictions aside, there were some serious air-quality problems, especially in urban airsheds; and the EPA along with the states did a pretty good job of cleaning things up. That was low-hanging fruit the agency could easily pick off.
A much larger, less manageable problem was acid rain.
While rainfall is naturally a bit acidic, the addition of sulfur and nitrogen oxides, mainly from the combustion of coal, clearly increases acidity. Air quality around coal-fired power plants was pretty bad, but local solutions resulted in multistate problems.
The mantra of those days was “the solution to pollution is dilution,” so power plant chimneys moved skyward.
The clustering of generation facilities along major waterways like the Ohio River, where they had easy access to coal, resulted in large regions of the East being subjected to increasingly acid precipitation as the new plants injected sulfate aerosols high enough in the atmosphere to travel hundreds, even thousands of miles.
Acid rain became a regional problem, both in the eastern United States and Europe. Our power plants were forced to shift to low-sulfur coals and to capture the sulfates with scrubbers.
Environmentalists and academics predicted horrible things would happen to extensive forests, but a comprehensive review published in 2004 in the journal Environmental Science and Policy concluded that “(f)ortunately, the dramatic forest dieback feared by some scientists in the 1980s never materialized.”
In fact, it was ultimately discovered that in general (there are exceptions in the highly polluted east), European forests grew more luxuriously, thanks to fertilization from nitrogen compounds emitted during coal combustion.
Over time, the scope of environmental concerns spawned by the first Earth Day grew increasingly large, culminating with global warming.
EPA’s reach increased proportionately, justified by the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA that granted the agency the power to regulate carbon dioxide if it deemed the gas “endangered” human health and welfare.
The agency issued its official finding of endangerment in 2009.
EPA’s sole metric to determine future endangerment consists of complicated computer models for future climate.
Anyone who is watching the coronavirus saga (and who isn’t?) knows that future prospects are completely dependent upon very fuzzy and plastic assumptions.
How effectively would people “socially isolate?” No one really knows. How many “silent” cases are out there contributing to undetected herd immunity?
Ditto.
It’s now known that the climate models are “with one notable exception” totally incapable of modeling the three-dimensional structure of climate change in the Earth’s vast tropics.
The one model that works predicts less warming than any other, warming so modest that it can’t justify “endangerment.”
It’s also recently been found that dreaded sea-level rise on the East Coast is pretty much the same as it is now as it was some three centuries ago, or long before the Industrial Revolution and the initiation of our ability to significantly modify the global atmosphere.
And it is also now clear from satellite data that our planet is rapidly becoming greener, thanks to the fertilizing effects of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. The effect about 10 times larger than we see from the increasing nitrogen deposition noted above.
In observance of the 50th anniversary of Earth Day and the subsequent founding of the EPA, it would be great if the agency “for once” ate some humble pie and reversed its finding of human endangerment from carbon dioxide.
That would really be cause for an Earth Day celebration!
Patrick J. Michaels is with the Competitive Enterprise Institute and is the co-author of “Scientocracy: The Tangled Web of Public Science and Public Policy.”
Read more at InsideSources
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--Earth Day At 50: Progress Cleaned Up America—Not Politics

Written by Steve Milloy on .
Posted in Latest news Environmental activists decreed in 1970 that April 22 was to be commemorated as Earth Day .
Fifty years later , if you listen to these activists , especially as they are fog-horned by the mainstream media , you might get the impression that our environment is in more jeopardy than ever .
Let ’ s stipulate that post-World War II America was much dirtier than 2020 America .
Industrial cities were beset with smog .
Pollution in rivers caught fire .
Waste dumps weren ’ t always managed well .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and exposure to chemicals like pesticides .
Litter was commonplace .
All that said , with the exception of three days in October 1948 , when the weather trapped acrid factory emissions in the valley town of Donora , Pa. , resulting in the deaths of 20 people , the environment was not an actual public health problem .
Still , the Donora tragedy propelled states and then the federal government to take action on the environment .
Awareness of the value of environmental protection and the regulation of emissions were all underway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Day .
Over the decades we have made tremendous progress .
Here are some examples to consider : • Air pollution has declined dramatically .
There is no chance of another Donora-like incident .
• Except for rare accidents like what occurred in Flint , Mich. , drinking water is clean and safe .
• Except for stubborn surface water problems caused by runoff ( as seen in the Gulf Mexico and the Chesapeake Bay ) surface water quality has dramatically improved .
Any industrial discharges to surface water have been cleaner than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • There are no more uncontrolled toxic waste sites that threaten anyone ’ s health .
• Pesticides are thoroughly tested for safety before use and use is strictly regulated .
How did all this progress happen ?
Environmentalists would like to take all the credit .
But the reality is more complex .
As our society became wealthier , we could afford the luxury of paying more attention to our environment .
That same wealth has made it possible to afford expensive laws and regulations and to afford scientific knowledge and technology @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was and remains wealth – a reality backed up by a closer examination of the environments of poorer nations around the world .
Air quality , for example , is awful in places like China and India not because they don ’ t know what to do or don ’ t care , they just can ’ t afford to do much about it at this point in time .
Despite all this progress , environmentalists used the 50th Earth Day to sound the alarm about climate change .
We have been told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the planet .
Climate is a variegated subject , but suffice to say , for present purposes , that since preindustrial times , there have been approximately 1.1 degrees Celsius of warming and almost 50 % more CO2 in the atmosphere .
Despite the alarm , no one knows what the future holds .
The assumption of the alarmists is that emissions are bad , but history tells a different story .
Since man started emitting vast quantities of greenhouse gases , more people are living longer and at a higher standard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from approximately 40 years ( 1850 ) to approximately 79 ( 2019 ) .
U.S. per capita GDP is up from approximately $ 2,825 in 1850 to approximately $ 53,000 in 2016 ( 2011 dollars ) .
The Earth is greener today than it was 40 years ago when we started taking satellite photos of the planet , according to NASA .
What is the future of the environment ?
No one knows for sure , but if the past is any hint of the future , more wealth , strong property rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will enable us to keep our environment clean .
We could also use less hysteria , which just causes money to be wasted versus being spent more productively .
Early hysteria about toxic wastes site ( such as Love Canal in upstate New York ) resulted in $ 50 billion being wasted litigating Superfund cleanups .
A lot of sites could have been cleaned up with that money .
Instead , it went to lawyers .
More generally , green groups have often taken extreme positions to advocate for overregulation that has impeded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Radicals often attack capitalism with the line , “ You didn ’ t build that.
” On Earth Day , that should be retorted with : “ You didn ’ t clean that up.
” Environmental protection has been a group effort enabled by our wealth , culture , and system of government .
Steve Milloy served on the Trump-Pence EPA transition team , is the author of “ Scare Pollution : Why and How to Fix the EPA ” ( Bench Press , 2016 ) and publishes JunkScience.com .

Written by Steve Milloy on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Environmental activists decreed in 1970 that April 22 was to be commemorated as Earth Day.
Fifty years later, if you listen to these activists, especially as they are fog-horned by the mainstream media, you might get the impression that our environment is in more jeopardy than ever.
Is this true?
Let’s stipulate that post-World War II America was much dirtier than 2020 America.
Industrial cities were beset with smog. Pollution in rivers caught fire. Waste dumps weren’t always managed well. Not much thought was given to use and exposure to chemicals like pesticides. Litter was commonplace.
All that said, with the exception of three days in October 1948, when the weather trapped acrid factory emissions in the valley town of Donora, Pa., resulting in the deaths of 20 people, the environment was not an actual public health problem.
Still, the Donora tragedy propelled states and then the federal government to take action on the environment.
Awareness of the value of environmental protection and the regulation of emissions were all underway by the time of the first Earth Day.
Over the decades we have made tremendous progress. Here are some examples to consider:
How did all this progress happen? Environmentalists would like to take all the credit. But the reality is more complex.
As our society became wealthier, we could afford the luxury of paying more attention to our environment.
That same wealth has made it possible to afford expensive laws and regulations and to afford scientific knowledge and technology development. The key, though, was and remains wealth – a reality backed up by a closer examination of the environments of poorer nations around the world.
Air quality, for example, is awful in places like China and India not because they don’t know what to do or don’t care, they just can’t afford to do much about it at this point in time.
Despite all this progress, environmentalists used the 50th Earth Day to sound the alarm about climate change. We have been told that climate change is literally the end of the planet.
Climate is a variegated subject, but suffice to say, for present purposes, that since preindustrial times, there have been approximately 1.1 degrees Celsius of warming and almost 50% more CO2 in the atmosphere.
Despite the alarm, no one knows what the future holds. The assumption of the alarmists is that emissions are bad, but history tells a different story.
Since man started emitting vast quantities of greenhouse gases, more people are living longer and at a higher standard of living.
Life expectancy is up from approximately 40 years (1850) to approximately 79 (2019). U.S. per capita GDP is up from approximately $2,825 in 1850 to approximately $53,000 in 2016 (2011 dollars).
The Earth is greener today than it was 40 years ago when we started taking satellite photos of the planet, according to NASA.
What is the future of the environment? No one knows for sure, but if the past is any hint of the future, more wealth, strong property rights, better education, and new technologies will enable us to keep our environment clean.
We could also use less hysteria, which just causes money to be wasted versus being spent more productively.
Early hysteria about toxic wastes site (such as Love Canal in upstate New York) resulted in $50 billion being wasted litigating Superfund cleanups.
A lot of sites could have been cleaned up with that money. Instead, it went to lawyers.
More generally, green groups have often taken extreme positions to advocate for overregulation that has impeded environmental protection and wasted time and money.
Radicals often attack capitalism with the line, “You didn’t build that.” On Earth Day, that should be retorted with: “You didn’t clean that up.”
Environmental protection has been a group effort enabled by our wealth, culture, and system of government.
Steve Milloy served on the Trump-Pence EPA transition team, is the author of “Scare Pollution: Why and How to Fix the EPA” (Bench Press, 2016) and publishes JunkScience.com.
Image by JoBischPeuchet from Pixabay
Read more at RealClearPolitics
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--Policymakers Demoted Pandemic Risks, Spread Climate Alarm Instead

Written by Terence Corcoran on .
Posted in Latest news One of the noble houses of global macroprudentialism , the International Monetary Fund ( pictured ) , declared Tuesday that “ The Great Lockdown ” will plunge the global economy into the “ worst recession since the Great Depression , surpassing that seen during the global financial crisis a decade ago.
” Along with the rest of the world ’ s economic overseers and protectors of financial stability , the IMF seems to have been unprepared for — and overwhelmed by — the arrival of COVID-19 .
That the IMF @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words of Tuesday ’ s World Economic Outlook .
“ The world has changed dramatically in the three months since our last World Economic Outlook update on the global economy .
A pandemic scenario had been raised as a possibility in previous economic policy discussions , but none of us had a meaningful sense of what it would look like on the ground and what it would mean for the economy.
” That ’ s some statement : “ None of us ” had a sense of what such a pandemic might impose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not clear who is included in the collective “ us , ” but it seems fair to assume the IMF is referring to the host of other members of the global fraternity of institutions that have assumed the role of guardians of the stability of the global financial system .
Among the institutions that should have been preparing for and assessing the risks of a global viral pandemic , in addition to the IMF , are the Financial Stability Board , the Bank for International Settlements , the G20 assembly of finance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the European Central Bank .
In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis , which “ none of us ” had anticipated , these global entities and national authorities adopted “ macroprudential policy ” to prevent the next global financial meltdown and , if possible , prepare plans to deal with a new blow to global financial stability .
Wikipedia has an excellent and authoritative review of the origins of macroprudentialism , describing it as an “ approach to financial regulation that aims to mitigate risk to the financial system as a whole.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial crisis , policymakers and economic researchers backed the need to reorient the global regulatory framework “ towards a macroprudential perspective.
” As the world sinks into lockdown and decline , one wonders why the whole macroprudential policy preparations , underway since the 2008 financial crisis and formally installed in 2016 , so obviously failed to prepare for the financial stability shakeup brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic ?
There are two explanations .
One is that the whole financial stability-macroprudential effort is an international bureaucratic collection of agencies dedicated to the pursuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explanation is that the macroprudential apparatus , from the IMF through to the FSB and down , was hijacked by activists pushing climate change as the dominant systemic risk of our time .
In 2017 , Mark Carney , then-Bank of England governor and head of the FSB , reviewed the successes of macroprudential policy and highlighted new risks .
The FSB , said Carney , is assessing “ emerging vulnerabilities affecting the global financial system … within a macroprudential perspective.
” Among the risks identified , he said , were “ risks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and misconduct in financial institutions.
” Carney has been something of a poster boy for climate change .
In a 2015 speech at Lloyd ’ s of London — titled “ Breaking the tragedy of the horizon — climate change and financial stability , ” Carney warned the insurance industry to prepare for big climate risks — including defaults , lawsuits , stranded assets and increased liabilities related to a changing climate .
The insurance execs picked up the macroprudential warnings .
The replacement of pandemic risks with climate change as a threat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was highlighted this week by Roger Pielke Jr. at the University of Colorado .
In 2008 , the No .
1 risk cited by insurance executives was a pandemic , described as “ a new highly infectious and fatal disease spreads through the human population.
” In 2019 , the top risk was identified as “ global temperature change.
” Pandemic was not even one of the top-10 insurance risks .
Over the past several years , but especially through 2019 , the major efforts of the macroprudes has been to spread alarm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around climate change .
Never mind pandemics and other more mundane but genuine financial risks , such a soaring government debt buildup and U.S. political schemes to dismantle Big Tech .
Instead , banks and other financial institutions have been pressed to get out of fossil fuels and shift into ethical investing , sustainable financing , green financing , social financing , impact investing , ESG investment , responsible investing .
At the turn of the 2020 New Year , Carney appeared on BBC television calling for “ action on financing ” from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ later , the Communist government in China informed the World Health Organization of pneumonia cases in Wuhan City , Hubei province , with an unknown cause .
Carney ’ s get-out-of oil call caused alarm within Canada ’ s fossil fuel industry .
At the time , oil was trading at US $ 55 a barrel .
On Tuesday , thanks in part to the pandemic Carney and the macroprudes failed to plan for , West Texas crude continued to languish at just above US $ 20 .

Written by Terence Corcoran on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
One of the noble houses of global macroprudentialism, the International Monetary Fund (pictured), declared Tuesday that “The Great Lockdown” will plunge the global economy into the “worst recession since the Great Depression, surpassing that seen during the global financial crisis a decade ago.”
Along with the rest of the world’s economic overseers and protectors of financial stability, the IMF seems to have been unprepared for — and overwhelmed by — the arrival of COVID-19.
That the IMF was blindsided is clear in the opening words of Tuesday’s World Economic Outlook.
“The world has changed dramatically in the three months since our last World Economic Outlook update on the global economy. A pandemic scenario had been raised as a possibility in previous economic policy discussions, but none of us had a meaningful sense of what it would look like on the ground and what it would mean for the economy.”
That’s some statement: “None of us” had a sense of what such a pandemic might impose on the world economy.
It’s not clear who is included in the collective “us,” but it seems fair to assume the IMF is referring to the host of other members of the global fraternity of institutions that have assumed the role of guardians of the stability of the global financial system.
Among the institutions that should have been preparing for and assessing the risks of a global viral pandemic, in addition to the IMF, are the Financial Stability Board, the Bank for International Settlements, the G20 assembly of finance ministers, the World Bank, and the European Central Bank.
In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, which “none of us” had anticipated, these global entities and national authorities adopted “macroprudential policy” to prevent the next global financial meltdown and, if possible, prepare plans to deal with a new blow to global financial stability.
Wikipedia has an excellent and authoritative review of the origins of macroprudentialism, describing it as an “approach to financial regulation that aims to mitigate risk to the financial system as a whole.”
In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, policymakers and economic researchers backed the need to reorient the global regulatory framework “towards a macroprudential perspective.”
As the world sinks into lockdown and decline, one wonders why the whole macroprudential policy preparations, underway since the 2008 financial crisis and formally installed in 2016, so obviously failed to prepare for the financial stability shakeup brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic?
There are two explanations. One is that the whole financial stability-macroprudential effort is an international bureaucratic collection of agencies dedicated to the pursuit of meaningless bureaucratic interventions.
The second explanation is that the macroprudential apparatus, from the IMF through to the FSB and down, was hijacked by activists pushing climate change as the dominant systemic risk of our time.
In 2017, Mark Carney, then-Bank of England governor and head of the FSB, reviewed the successes of macroprudential policy and highlighted new risks.
The FSB, said Carney, is assessing “emerging vulnerabilities affecting the global financial system … within a macroprudential perspective.”
Among the risks identified, he said, were “risks from FinTech, climate‐related financial risks, and misconduct in financial institutions.”
Carney has been something of a poster boy for climate change.
In a 2015 speech at Lloyd’s of London — titled “Breaking the tragedy of the horizon — climate change and financial stability,” Carney warned the insurance industry to prepare for big climate risks — including defaults, lawsuits, stranded assets and increased liabilities related to a changing climate.
The insurance execs picked up the macroprudential warnings.
The replacement of pandemic risks with climate change as a threat to the global financial and economic system was highlighted this week by Roger Pielke Jr. at the University of Colorado.
In 2008, the No. 1 risk cited by insurance executives was a pandemic, described as “a new highly infectious and fatal disease spreads through the human population.”
In 2019, the top risk was identified as “global temperature change.” Pandemic was not even one of the top-10 insurance risks.
Over the past several years, but especially through 2019, the major efforts of the macroprudes has been to spread alarm about the financial stability risks allegedly building around climate change.
Never mind pandemics and other more mundane but genuine financial risks, such a soaring government debt buildup and U.S. political schemes to dismantle Big Tech.
Instead, banks and other financial institutions have been pressed to get out of fossil fuels and shift into ethical investing, sustainable financing, green financing, social financing, impact investing, ESG investment, responsible investing.
At the turn of the 2020 New Year, Carney appeared on BBC television calling for “action on financing” from banks against fossil investments.
One day later, the Communist government in China informed the World Health Organization of pneumonia cases in Wuhan City, Hubei province, with an unknown cause.
Carney’s get-out-of oil call caused alarm within Canada’s fossil fuel industry. At the time, oil was trading at US$55 a barrel.
On Tuesday, thanks in part to the pandemic Carney and the macroprudes failed to plan for, West Texas crude continued to languish at just above US$20.
Read rest at Financial Post
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--Earth Day Activists Use Lockdown To Justify Climate Police State

Written by Jennifer Harper on .
Posted in Latest news Wednesday marks the 50th anniversary of Earth Day .
Yes , the eco-minded have promoted their climate and environmental policies for five decades .
Massive , splashy worldwide strikes , marches , and celebrations to mark the date were originally planned by Earthday.org and EarthDayLive.org — both global organizations .
Everything has now gone online because of the coronavirus emergency .
The eco-folks may have reason to rejoice , however .
They see opportunity via virus : Social and economic restrictions have locked down pedestrians and foot traffic , curtailed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assorted urban phenomena .
Such things have been on the green clan ’ s to-do list since the beginning .
“ The fights against the coronavirus and the climate crisis go hand-in-hand , and as we work to flatten the curve of this pandemic , we must strive toward the longer-term goal of building a society rooted in stainability and justice , ” advise organizers for EarthDay Live .
“ The coronavirus pandemic does not shut us down .
Instead , it reminds us of what ’ s at stake in our fight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t demand change to transform our planet and meet our climate crisis , our current state will become the new normal , ” counsels Earthday.org .
It presents an opportunity to re-brand the environmental mission and drum up interest .
“ The climate activist community has been waiting for decades for this type of muscular government intervention in the economy and society .
They have long sought to seize the opportunity to impose their world view , central planning and the banning of what they deem are non-climate-friendly aspects of our lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In short : If you like living under the coronavirus fears and government-mandated lockdowns , then you ’ ll love living your life under a climate emergency , ” advises Marc Morano , founder of the Climate Depot , which has long debunked extreme climate theory .
Media coverage showcases striking images of blue skies , mountaintops , and pristine city streets , suggesting air pollution has abated and animal life is stirring anew .
Mr. Morano cites 30 examples of excited commentary from Al Gore , the United Nations , and PBS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are now hatching an agenda .
“ The climate movement may now be poised to plan and dictate a new earth-friendly world in the aftermath of the coronavirus .
The climate activists quickly began to mobilize how to use the governments ’ response to the coronavirus pandemic as a model for the climate scare , ” Mr. Morano observes .
“ Many in the climate action community essentially want the public to get used to this living under some sort of lockdown .
They want at least a portion of these governmental lockdown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate change after the coronavirus pandemic passes.
” “ The coronavirus police state is only temporary I hope .
The climate police state would be permanent , ” tweeted Steve Milloy , founder of JunkScience.com , a news site citing faulty scientific data and analysis .

Written by Jennifer Harper on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Wednesday marks the 50th anniversary of Earth Day. Yes, the eco-minded have promoted their climate and environmental policies for five decades.
Massive, splashy worldwide strikes, marches, and celebrations to mark the date were originally planned by Earthday.org and EarthDayLive.org — both global organizations. Everything has now gone online because of the coronavirus emergency.
The eco-folks may have reason to rejoice, however. They see opportunity via virus: Social and economic restrictions have locked down pedestrians and foot traffic, curtailed air and auto travel, and quashed assorted urban phenomena.
Such things have been on the green clan’s to-do list since the beginning.
“The fights against the coronavirus and the climate crisis go hand-in-hand, and as we work to flatten the curve of this pandemic, we must strive toward the longer-term goal of building a society rooted in stainability and justice,” advise organizers for EarthDay Live.
“The coronavirus pandemic does not shut us down. Instead, it reminds us of what’s at stake in our fight for the planet. If we don’t demand change to transform our planet and meet our climate crisis, our current state will become the new normal,” counsels Earthday.org.
It presents an opportunity to re-brand the environmental mission and drum up interest.
“The climate activist community has been waiting for decades for this type of muscular government intervention in the economy and society. They have long sought to seize the opportunity to impose their world view, central planning and the banning of what they deem are non-climate-friendly aspects of our lives and remake society in their image. In short: If you like living under the coronavirus fears and government-mandated lockdowns, then you’ll love living your life under a climate emergency,” advises Marc Morano, founder of the Climate Depot, which has long debunked extreme climate theory.
Media coverage showcases striking images of blue skies, mountaintops, and pristine city streets, suggesting air pollution has abated and animal life is stirring anew.
Mr. Morano cites 30 examples of excited commentary from Al Gore, the United Nations, and PBS to name a few. Eager activists are now hatching an agenda.
“The climate movement may now be poised to plan and dictate a new earth-friendly world in the aftermath of the coronavirus. The climate activists quickly began to mobilize how to use the governments’ response to the coronavirus pandemic as a model for the climate scare,” Mr. Morano observes.
“Many in the climate action community essentially want the public to get used to this living under some sort of lockdown. They want at least a portion of these governmental lockdown powers to remain and be used for climate change after the coronavirus pandemic passes.”
Others agree.
“The coronavirus police state is only temporary I hope. The climate police state would be permanent,” tweeted Steve Milloy, founder of JunkScience.com, a news site citing faulty scientific data and analysis.
Read rest at Washington Times
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--Michael Moore Climate Doc Slams Activists Pushing Green Energy

Written by David Ng on .
Posted in Latest news Left-wing documentary filmmaker Michael Moore is once again sounding the alarm on climate change — but this time he is blaming fellow environmentalists , saying that efforts like solar energy and electric cars are not helping to solve the problem and that the planet is in “ deep , deep trouble.
” Michael Moore was promoting the new documentary Planet of the Humans , which was released for free on YouTube on Tuesday , just one day before Earth Day .
Moore serves as an executive producer on the documentary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a frequent Moore collaborator .
The movie highlights the failures of the mainstream environmental movement , assigning blame to corporate interests as well as solar and wind energy companies and electric car manufacturers , which the doc claims rely too much on fossil fuels and deforestation .
“ It seems like we have been losing the battle , ” Moore said in an interview with Reuters .
“ We are in deep , deep trouble.
” “ We have ignored the warnings , and instead all sorts of so-called leaders have steered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might save us , ” Moore said in a statement .
“ This movie takes no prisoners and exposes the truth about how we have been led astray in the fight to save the planet , to the point where if we don ’ t reverse course right now , events like the current pandemic will become numerous , devastating and insurmountable .
The feel-good experience of this movie is that we actually have the smarts and the will to not let this happen — but only if we immediately launch a new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agency that he once believed that solar panels and electric cars were a good idea .
“ But I didn ’ t really think about where is the electricity coming from ?
” “ I assumed solar panels would last forever .
I didn ’ t know what went into the making of them , ” the Oscar-winner added , referring to raw materials , including quartz and the fossil fuels needed to manufacture the panels .
Director Jeff Gibbs said that a better approach would be for people to have fewer children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ planet is suicide , ” he told Reuters .
“ We are losing the battle to stop climate change because we are following environmental leaders , many of whom are well-intentioned , but who ’ ve sold out the green movement to wealthy interests and corporate America , ” said Gibbs .

Written by David Ng on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
Left-wing documentary filmmaker Michael Moore is once again sounding the alarm on climate change — but this time he is blaming fellow environmentalists, saying that efforts like solar energy and electric cars are not helping to solve the problem and that the planet is in “deep, deep trouble.”
Michael Moore was promoting the new documentary Planet of the Humans, which was released for free on YouTube on Tuesday, just one day before Earth Day.
Moore serves as an executive producer on the documentary, which was directed by Jeff Gibbs, a frequent Moore collaborator.
The movie highlights the failures of the mainstream environmental movement, assigning blame to corporate interests as well as solar and wind energy companies and electric car manufacturers, which the doc claims rely too much on fossil fuels and deforestation.
“It seems like we have been losing the battle,” Moore said in an interview with Reuters. “We are in deep, deep trouble.”
“We have ignored the warnings, and instead all sorts of so-called leaders have steered us away from the real solutions that might save us,” Moore said in a statement.
“This movie takes no prisoners and exposes the truth about how we have been led astray in the fight to save the planet, to the point where if we don’t reverse course right now, events like the current pandemic will become numerous, devastating and insurmountable. The feel-good experience of this movie is that we actually have the smarts and the will to not let this happen — but only if we immediately launch a new environmental uprising.”
Moore told the news agency that he once believed that solar panels and electric cars were a good idea. “But I didn’t really think about where is the electricity coming from?”
“I assumed solar panels would last forever. I didn’t know what went into the making of them,” the Oscar-winner added, referring to raw materials, including quartz and the fossil fuels needed to manufacture the panels.
Director Jeff Gibbs said that a better approach would be for people to have fewer children. “Infinite growth on a finite planet is suicide,” he told Reuters.
“We are losing the battle to stop climate change because we are following environmental leaders, many of whom are well-intentioned, but who’ve sold out the green movement to wealthy interests and corporate America,” said Gibbs.
Read more at Breitbart
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--Earth Day At 50: Where The Heck Are My Floating Polar Bears?

Written by Stephen Kruiser on .
Posted in Latest news I Was Promised That Manhattan Would Be Flooded by Now Today marks the fiftieth anniversary of the hippie springtime festival of lamentations known as Earth Day .
Honestly , I almost never give Earth Day a thought but this year ’ s occurrence provides me with an opportunity to write about something other than the dreaded coronavirus .
Sure , we will get to some of that too , but let us turn on all of the lights in our houses and examine the folly of trying to “ save @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have always been of the opinion this planet doesn ’ t need to be saved from anything .
Ol ’ Earth has made it through a lot worse than the perceived scourge of puny humans .
The arrogance involved in the mindset that we are influencing the planet is staggering .
Having written that , I feel no particular obligation to Earth .
What ’ s it ever really done for me ?
Earth Day originally had an environmental , conservationist focus , which is something that most people can get behind .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ obligation to the planet .
Like many people , I like to spend time out in nature .
I grew up in a little town in the White Mountains of Arizona where my friends and I would spend half of the summer camping in the woods near our houses .
We were all instinctively respectful of our surroundings , innately environmentalist if you will .
Unfortunately , environmentalism was quickly co-opted by the climate change freakshow .
They ruin everything they touch , of course , and they ’ ve had their filthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for quite some time now .
Now , environmentalism and climate hysteria are constantly conflated : Somewhere along the way , the United Nations decided to try and justify its existence by becoming the primary pimps of climate change hysteria : It took some time , but the UN finally decided to try and take over Earth Day , passing a resolution in 2009 renaming it — I kid you not — International Mother Earth Day .
Mother Earth is clearly urging a call to action .
Nature is suffering .
Australian fires @ @ @ @ @ @ @ invasion in Kenya .
Now we face COVID -19 , a worldwide health pandemic link to the health of our ecosystem .
Climate change , man-made changes to nature as well as crimes that disrupt biodiversity , such as deforestation , land-use change , intensified agriculture and livestock production or the growing illegal wildlife trade , can increase contact and the transmission of infectious diseases from animals to humans ( zoonotic diseases ) like COVID-19 .
Never let a crisis go to waste , right ?
I ’ m not sure if I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disruption of biodiversity , because I ’ m not really sure if such a thing even exists .
That probably won ’ t be the only hot take this Earth Day attempting to link perceived climate crimes to our current plague situation .
I think I ’ ll spend the day not polluting my mind with any International Mother Earth Day propaganda .

Written by Stephen Kruiser on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
I Was Promised That Manhattan Would Be Flooded by Now
Today marks the fiftieth anniversary of the hippie springtime festival of lamentations known as Earth Day.
Honestly, I almost never give Earth Day a thought but this year’s occurrence provides me with an opportunity to write about something other than the dreaded coronavirus.
Sure, we will get to some of that too, but let us turn on all of the lights in our houses and examine the folly of trying to “save” this planet from anything.
I have always been of the opinion this planet doesn’t need to be saved from anything. Ol’ Earth has made it through a lot worse than the perceived scourge of puny humans.
The arrogance involved in the mindset that we are influencing the planet is staggering.
Having written that, I feel no particular obligation to Earth. What’s it ever really done for me?
Earth Day originally had an environmental, conservationist focus, which is something that most people can get behind. I was obviously kidding about feeling no obligation to the planet.
Like many people, I like to spend time out in nature. I grew up in a little town in the White Mountains of Arizona where my friends and I would spend half of the summer camping in the woods near our houses.
We were all instinctively respectful of our surroundings, innately environmentalist if you will.
Unfortunately, environmentalism was quickly co-opted by the climate change freakshow. They ruin everything they touch, of course, and they’ve had their filthy, fear-mongering paws all over Earth Day for quite some time now.
Now, environmentalism and climate hysteria are constantly conflated:
To preserve global biodiversity and landscapes, reversing climate change is essential. On this #EarthDay2020, let’s pledge ourselves to sustainable development & consumption and less carbon footprint to make Earth a better place for all. — Jagat Prakash Nadda (@JPNadda) April 22, 2020
Somewhere along the way, the United Nations decided to try and justify its existence by becoming the primary pimps of climate change hysteria:
#PMK advocates for a Green and #JustRecovery in the Post #COVID19 World “We must act decisively to protect our planet from both the coronavirus and the existential threat of climate disruption” – UN Secretary-General António Guterres
#PMKforGreenRecovery #EarthDay2020 pic.twitter.com/2bkKZPiijX — Vinoba Bhoopathy (@vinobha) April 22, 2020
It took some time, but the UN finally decided to try and take over Earth Day, passing a resolution in 2009 renaming it — I kid you not — International Mother Earth Day.
Here’s a snippet from this year’s United Nations International Mother Earth Day message:
When Mother Earth sends us a message Mother Earth is clearly urging a call to action. Nature is suffering. Australian fires, heat records and the worst locust invasion in Kenya. Now we face COVID -19, a worldwide health pandemic link to the health of our ecosystem. Climate change, man-made changes to nature as well as crimes that disrupt biodiversity, such as deforestation, land-use change, intensified agriculture and livestock production or the growing illegal wildlife trade, can increase contact and the transmission of infectious diseases from animals to humans (zoonotic diseases) like COVID-19.
Never let a crisis go to waste, right?
I’m not sure if I’ve ever engaged in any criminal disruption of biodiversity, because I’m not really sure if such a thing even exists.
That probably won’t be the only hot take this Earth Day attempting to link perceived climate crimes to our current plague situation.
I think I’ll spend the day not polluting my mind with any International Mother Earth Day propaganda.
Namaste.
Read rest at PJ Media
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print


climatechangedispatch--2020-04-22--IPCC Chairman, Father Of Global Warming Deception, Dies At 88

Written by Paul Homewood on .
Posted in Latest news John Houghton was of course at the heart of the global warming deception from the very early days , as Chairman of the IPCC Working Group I for the first three Assessment Reports between 1990 and 2001 .
It was under Houghton ’ s tenure in the First Assessment Report ( FAR ) that the process began of writing the all-important Summary for Policymakers which did not reflect the detailed chapters .
Houghton ’ s Summary claimed it was confident that the increase in CO2 alone had been responsible for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 20thC .
Yet the main report was far more guarded and evenly flatly contradictory .
But none of this stopped Houghton ’ s Summary demanding immediate reductions of 60 % in emissions .
It was the FAR which included John Houghton ’ s own graph , showing that temperatures were higher in the Middle Ages than the 20thC .
Yet by 2001 , the same Houghton was giving Michael Mann ’ s hopelessly flawed hockey stick top billing , even being pictured in front of it long after it had been debunked .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the start , thanks largely to the two men initially responsible for setting it up , Bert Bolin and John Houghton .
It was regularly portrayed as the global authority on climate change , being made up of thousands of scientists from around the world .
In reality , most of the key contributors were drawn from a surprisingly small network of not more than a few dozen predominantly American and British academics and government employees , who were already as firmly committed as Bolin and Houghton to the belief that global warming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Houghton ’ s own Hadley Centre .
We are still paying the cost of John Houghton ’ s obsession with climate change .
Read more at Not A Lot Of People Know That

Written by Paul Homewood on Apr 22, 2020 . Posted in Latest news
John Houghton was of course at the heart of the global warming deception from the very early days, as Chairman of the IPCC Working Group I for the first three Assessment Reports between 1990 and 2001.
It was under Houghton’s tenure in the First Assessment Report (FAR) that the process began of writing the all-important Summary for Policymakers which did not reflect the detailed chapters.
Houghton’s Summary claimed it was confident that the increase in CO2 alone had been responsible for over half of the warming during the 20thC.
Yet the main report was far more guarded and evenly flatly contradictory. But none of this stopped Houghton’s Summary demanding immediate reductions of 60% in emissions.
It was the FAR which included John Houghton’s own graph, showing that temperatures were higher in the Middle Ages than the 20thC.
Yet by 2001, the same Houghton was giving Michael Mann’s hopelessly flawed hockey stick top billing, even being pictured in front of it long after it had been debunked.
The whole IPCC process was compromised from the start, thanks largely to the two men initially responsible for setting it up, Bert Bolin and John Houghton.
It was regularly portrayed as the global authority on climate change, being made up of thousands of scientists from around the world.
In reality, most of the key contributors were drawn from a surprisingly small network of not more than a few dozen predominantly American and British academics and government employees, who were already as firmly committed as Bolin and Houghton to the belief that global warming was serious. Many of these came from Houghton’s own Hadley Centre.
We are still paying the cost of John Houghton’s obsession with climate change.
Read more at Not A Lot Of People Know That
Be Social And Share! Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
TruthSocial
Gab
Telegram
Mastodon
Buffer
Email
More
Reddit
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Pocket
Tumblr
Print