committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-17--Facebook climate center shows hurricanes and fires are nature not climate

Joe Biden , Gavin Newsom , Nancy Pelosi and a host of politicians and media celebrities have been blaming devastating hurricanes and fires on climate change .
Scientists at places like NASA , NOAA , the U.K. Met Office and the UN IPCC agree that any meaningful weather impacts from global warming are warnings for the future , not driving the present .
Team warming pressured Facebook to push their message on its platform and Mark Zuckerberg relented .
Zuckerberg just launched a new Facebook “ Climate Science Information Center ” that is pushing the climate narrative directly into subscriber @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve probably already seen the first installment .
It reads , “ did you know that droughts , storms and extreme weather are increasingly likely with a temperature rise above 1.5°C ?
” Just how “ likely ” is a subject for scientific debate , but the fact that the world ’ s scientific organizations charged with keeping temperature records all agree that the Earth has not warmed “ above 1.5°C ” is not .
Thanks , Facebook , for the reveal !
NASA reports that , “ according to an ongoing temperature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Goddard Institute for Space Studies ( GISS ) , the average global temperature on Earth has increased by a little more than 1° Celsius ( 2° Fahrenheit ) since 1880.
” 1880 !
Half a century before atmospheric CO2 concentrations had even risen significantly !
That ’ s from NASA ’ s GISS which is led by the other Gavin , Gavin Schmidt , who is a dyed in the wool warmist himself .
Schmidt has pushed GISS so deeply into the warming campaign that a dramatically large group of NASA ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , felt compelled to write NASA and demand America ’ s space agency knock off the propaganda and get back to exploring space .
Read the letter and see who signed it .
It ’ s a “ who ’ s who ” of heroes in space .
As Facebook revealed , the Earth has not warmed enough to be what causes today ’ s hurricane ’ s in the Gulf , or fires in the West .
Biden , Newsom , Pelosi and the rest are scientifically flat out wrong .
Join @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will douse climate exaggerations in cold hard facts

Facebook let it slip.
Joe Biden, Gavin Newsom, Nancy Pelosi and a host of politicians and media celebrities have been blaming devastating hurricanes and fires on climate change.
It’s just not true.
Scientists at places like NASA, NOAA, the U.K. Met Office and the UN IPCC agree that any meaningful weather impacts from global warming are warnings for the future, not driving the present.
Team warming pressured Facebook to push their message on its platform and Mark Zuckerberg relented.
Zuckerberg just launched a new Facebook “Climate Science Information Center” that is pushing the climate narrative directly into subscriber’s news feeds.
You’ve probably already seen the first installment.
It reads, “did you know that droughts, storms and extreme weather are increasingly likely with a temperature rise above 1.5°C?”
Just how “likely” is a subject for scientific debate, but the fact that the world’s scientific organizations charged with keeping temperature records all agree that the Earth has not warmed “above 1.5°C” is not.
Thanks, Facebook, for the reveal!
NASA reports that, “according to an ongoing temperature analysis conducted by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), the average global temperature on Earth has increased by a little more than 1° Celsius (2° Fahrenheit) since 1880.”
1880! Half a century before atmospheric CO2 concentrations had even risen significantly!
That’s from NASA’s GISS which is led by the other Gavin, Gavin Schmidt, who is a dyed in the wool warmist himself. Schmidt has pushed GISS so deeply into the warming campaign that a dramatically large group of NASA’s space pioneers, including Apollo Astronauts, felt compelled to write NASA and demand America’s space agency knock off the propaganda and get back to exploring space. Read the letter and see who signed it. It’s a “who’s who” of heroes in space.
As Facebook revealed, the Earth has not warmed enough to be what causes today’s hurricane’s in the Gulf, or fires in the West.
Biden, Newsom, Pelosi and the rest are scientifically flat out wrong.
Join CFACT for the unprecedented worldwide event that
will douse climate exaggerations in cold hard facts
Get tickets now!


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-16--Is “Mother Earth” angry? Countering Pelosi’s climate hustle

The Level of ( Fill in Your Own Words ) in this Challenges Limits .
“ Mother Earth is angry , ” the San Francisco Democrat said during an appearance Thursday on MSNBC .
“ She ’ s telling us — whether she ’ s telling us with hurricanes on the Gulf Coast , fires in the West , whatever it is … that the climate crisis is real and has an impact.
” I Will Keep this Short .
So hurricanes on the Gulf Coast are Mother Earth throwing a tantrum ?
Well will all due respect , Mother @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Is the near record low hurricane season in the Pacific basin also a sign of anger , or that she is tired ?
Enquiring minds want to know , which a statement like was made above is where I would see it , at a grocery check-out line .
( it was the name of the magazine that would catch my eye .
Of course so did Mad Magazine ) .
So to help the speaker , before she rips this up , lets review how mad mother earth is with hurricanes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end has had 4 major landfalls .
I will just use 3 decades of the many , with more than twice that It is astounding to hear those comments as they either IGNORE what is a known if one knows it , which is deception , or reveals ignorance to what actually has happened which I suspect is the case .
Yet neither options stops the zealot when the ends justify the means , and if the ends are a political agenda , then this is just another weapon .
While we all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wildfire season is the worst on record .
( I handled that in another blog ) But for the US nothing matches what was going on in the early part of the 20th century , when 5 times more acreage was being burned than any year in the last 10 !
This combined with the aforementioned hurricane burst in those years , and the unreal heat and dust bowl , far outstrips anything we are seeing around the nation that the speaker is saying is evidence that Mother Earth is angry with us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You have seen a lot of blogs from me lately because this is a full-scale volley in the weaponization of weather is underway so I return that with examples for you to see .
Pure and simple .
Back in spring I forecasted there would be a pivot to this as we closed in on the election , and they are coming fast and furious , and are designed to simply grab a headline with no questioning from the willing media .
But if I see something , I say something , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of that .
Las Vegas should open odds on who will say what next , and when .

The Level of (Fill in Your Own Words) in this Challenges Limits.
Okay, from Speaker Pelosi.
“Mother Earth is angry,” the San Francisco Democrat said during an appearance Thursday on MSNBC. “She’s telling us — whether she’s telling us with hurricanes on the Gulf Coast, fires in the West, whatever it is … that the climate crisis is real and has an impact.”
I Will Keep this Short. So hurricanes on the Gulf Coast are Mother Earth throwing a tantrum?
Well will all due respect, Mother Earth has been a lot angrier before. Is the near record low hurricane season in the Pacific basin also a sign of anger, or that she is tired? Enquiring minds want to know, which a statement like was made above is where I would see it, at a grocery check-out line.(it was the name of the magazine that would catch my eye. Of course so did Mad Magazine).
So to help the speaker, before she rips this up, lets review how mad mother earth is with hurricanes. This decade which is about to end has had 4 major landfalls.
I will just use 3 decades of the many, with more than twice that
1930s, 8 major landfalls:
1940s. 10 major landfalls:
1950s. 11 major landfalls:
It is astounding to hear those comments as they either IGNORE what is a known if one knows it, which is deception, or reveals ignorance to what actually has happened which I suspect is the case. Yet neither options stops the zealot when the ends justify the means, and if the ends are a political agenda, then this is just another weapon.
While we all know for parts of the west this wildfire season is the worst on record. ( I handled that in another blog) But for the US nothing matches what was going on in the early part of the 20th century, when 5 times more acreage was being burned than any year in the last 10!
This combined with the aforementioned hurricane burst in those years, and the unreal heat and dust bowl, far outstrips anything we are seeing around the nation that the speaker is saying is evidence that Mother Earth is angry with us and we are in a climate crisis.
You have seen a lot of blogs from me lately because this is a full-scale volley in the weaponization of weather is underway so I return that with examples for you to see. Pure and simple. Back in spring I forecasted there would be a pivot to this as we closed in on the election, and they are coming fast and furious, and are designed to simply grab a headline with no questioning from the willing media. But if I see something, I say something, and this is yet another classic display of that.
Las Vegas should open odds on who will say what next, and when.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-16--Biden fell for the most radical climate hustles in the book

If you thought Governor Newsom using climate to distract from his failure to protect California from wildfires was outrageous , brace yourself for Biden .
Presidential candidate Joe Biden ’ s campaign drove him over to Delaware ’ s Natural History Museum where he read out the entire litany of the most divisive , unscientific talking points in the global warming playbook .
Biden blamed a biblical list of plagues — fires , hurricanes , droughts , floods , and more on climate , despite the powerful scientific evidence that today ’ s weather is about nature , not man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CFACT will bust the entire scam of frightening people about the weather wide open during the worldwide streaming event of our exciting feature film , Climate Hustle 2 : Rise of the Climate Monarchy on September 24th at 8:00 PM in every time zone on Earth .
You absolutely need to join us .
Tell everyone you know .
As for climate and hurricanes , sigh , let ’ s repeat that there is little evidence that storm frequency and the modest global warming of the last century are linked .
As scientist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hitting the U.S. have not increased in frequency or intensity since 1900 .
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has said “ it is premature to conclude that human activities—and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming—have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity.
” The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says it too lacks evidence to show that warming is making storms and flooding worse .
Does anyone with a sober head on their shoulders actually believe that “ but for ” your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Hurricane Sally or the fires ravaging the West would be noticeably different ?
If we put up more intermittent wind turbines and solar panels and switch to short-range electric vehicles will natural disaster abate ?
Mandatory Green energy products would not have stopped a category four hurricane from destroying Galveston , Texas in 1900 .
Green taxes and subsidies would not have prevented American farmland from becoming a drought-stricken “ dust bowl ” during the Great Depression , or the Great Labor Day Hurricane of 1935 from developing into the most intense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CFACT knows weather history .
We weren ’ t born yesterday .
Joe Biden certainly wasn ’ t .
He should know better .
Governor Newsom and the rest of the climate campaign must cease exploiting real human tragedy to push their climate narrative .
Someone should protect Joe Biden from falling for it .
Even if you accept everything the climate computer modelers project in their simulations , the meaningful impacts of climate change lie well into the future .
Let ’ s discuss that .
Let ’ s compare the accuracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ temperature .
Let ’ s weigh what we learn and soberly perform cost-benefit analyses on the “ solutions ” they insist must be mandatory , without ignoring what China and others will do .
Joe Biden should lead by telling the climate crowd to stop hustling us and instead join us in examining the facts .
Join CFACT for a worldwide debunking of weather scares and the rest of the tricks of the warming campaign .
Get tickets now !
Get tickets now !
September 24th at 8 PM anywhere on Earth Get @ @ @

If you thought Governor Newsom using climate to distract from his failure to protect California from wildfires was outrageous, brace yourself for Biden.
Presidential candidate Joe Biden’s campaign drove him over to Delaware’s Natural History Museum where he read out the entire litany of the most divisive, unscientific talking points in the global warming playbook.
Watch Biden at CFACT.org.
Biden blamed a biblical list of plagues — fires, hurricanes, droughts, floods, and more on climate, despite the powerful scientific evidence that today’s weather is about nature, not man. They actually had him call it doomsday!
CFACT will bust the entire scam of frightening people about the weather wide open during the worldwide streaming event of our exciting feature film, Climate Hustle 2: Rise of the Climate Monarchy on September 24th at 8:00 PM in every time zone on Earth. You absolutely need to join us. Tell everyone you know.
The Wall Street Journal summed up Biden’s science errors perfectly:
As for climate and hurricanes, sigh, let’s repeat that there is little evidence that storm frequency and the modest global warming of the last century are linked. As scientist Roger Pielke Jr. has noted, hurricanes hitting the U.S. have not increased in frequency or intensity since 1900.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has said “it is premature to conclude that human activities—and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming—have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity.” The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says it too lacks evidence to show that warming is making storms and flooding worse.
Lawyer’s call it “but for” causation.
Does anyone with a sober head on their shoulders actually believe that “but for” your over-the-the top car driving, electricity-using lifestyle, Hurricane Sally or the fires ravaging the West would be noticeably different? If we put up more intermittent wind turbines and solar panels and switch to short-range electric vehicles will natural disaster abate?
Mandatory Green energy products would not have stopped a category four hurricane from destroying Galveston, Texas in 1900. Green taxes and subsidies would not have prevented American farmland from becoming a drought-stricken “dust bowl” during the Great Depression, or the Great Labor Day Hurricane of 1935 from developing into the most intense Atlantic storm ever to make landfall. CFACT knows weather history. We weren’t born yesterday. Joe Biden certainly wasn’t. He should know better. Governor Newsom and the rest of the climate campaign must cease exploiting real human tragedy to push their climate narrative. Someone should protect Joe Biden from falling for it. Even if you accept everything the climate computer modelers project in their simulations, the meaningful impacts of climate change lie well into the future. Let’s discuss that. Let’s compare the accuracy of the computer models against actual measured temperature. Let’s weigh what we learn and soberly perform cost-benefit analyses on the “solutions” they insist must be mandatory, without ignoring what China and others will do. Joe Biden should lead by telling the climate crowd to stop hustling us and instead join us in examining the facts. Join CFACT for a worldwide debunking of weather scares
and the rest of the tricks of the warming campaign. September 24th at 8 PM anywhere on Earth Get tickets now!


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-16--WW ll fighter pilot’s widow determined to keep her husband’s plane

Seventy-five years after the guns fell silent at the end of World War II , the Florida widow of a fighter pilot in that bloody conflict is battling to hold on to her late husband ’ s private airplane that is a cherished memory of her husband ’ s remarkable life .
Chattanooga native Bob Cousar was just 17 when he enlisted in what was then the Army Air Corps in 1942 .
He was trained to fly the feared P-47 fighter , but the war ended before he had a chance to show his mettle in combat .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GI Bill and eventually earned a Ph .
D. in Theology from the University of Edinburgh .
Over two decades into his ministry back in the U.S. , he married Atlanta native Sue Ann Washington in 1977 .
Before long , the couple were off to Brazil , where they spent 13 years as missionaries along the mighty Amazon River .
In the 1990s , Bob and Sue Ann moved to North Captiva Island near Fort Myers on Florida ’ s southwestern Gulf Coast .
There , Bob continued his ministry work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indulged his love of flying by constructing an airplane , a single-engine BD-4 , from scratch .
For 18 years , Bob carefully assembled the plane in his yard and was nearing completion when he passed away at 93 in April 2018 .
“ He loved it .
He always enjoyed working on it , ” Sue Ann told WINK News .
“ Right up until he couldn ’ t , he ’ d come down and do this or that on it.
” Sue Ann now has to deal with two local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do than use a county nuisance ordinance to force the widow to remove Bob ’ s plane from her property .
She recently received a notice of Nuisance Accumulation Violation from Lee County and will have to defend the presence of the plane on her property at a hearing on September 28 .
The county ordinance defines Nuisance Accumulation as “ garbage , refuse , trash , rubbish , inoperable vehicles , or abandoned or lost property.
” Bob ’ s plane violates none of this .
Furthermore , the ordinance is designed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and safety of the community.
” Bob ’ s plane in no way undermines thi s goal .
On the contrary , the plane , which is backed partly into the woods of her vacant lot adjacent to Sue Ann ’ s home , has become a popular attraction for residents and tourists alike .
Many of them like to have their picture taken standing in front of the plane .
None of her neighbors objects to it ; in fact , they openly support Sue Ann ’ s right to keep the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s more , the island has an air strip which is regularly used by 35 limited partner-owners .
It ’ s not uncommon for people flying in to park their planes in front of their homes .
No one objects .
And what of the couple who lodged the complaint against Sue Ann with the county ?
Neither of them currently lives on North Captiva Island .
If Lee County orders Sue Ann to remove the plane from her property , it would have to be at her expense .
There is no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The island is served by a water taxi which takes people to nearby Pine Island , where there is a bridge connecting to the mainland .
This means Sue Ann would have to pay to have the plane ’ s wings removed , loaded onto a barge , taken to the mainland , and disposed of…somewhere .
This would be a travesty to scrap 40 years of her husband ’ s work building this Experimental Class BD-4 airplane that has been a part of their married life together .
Outraged over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Sue Ann , her neighbors have launched a petition in support of her .
The petition will be presented to the county at the September 28 hearing .
Readers can show their solidarity with Sue Ann by signing the petition , which is here .
The threat to Sue Ann Cousar ’ s husband ’ s memory is no way to treat the widow of a WW II vet .

Seventy-five years after the guns fell silent at the end of World War II, the Florida widow of a fighter pilot in that bloody conflict is battling to hold on to her late husband’s private airplane that is a cherished memory of her husband’s remarkable life.
Chattanooga native Bob Cousar was just 17 when he enlisted in what was then the Army Air Corps in 1942. He was trained to fly the feared P-47 fighter, but the war ended before he had a chance to show his mettle in combat. After the war, Bob attended college on the GI Bill and eventually earned a Ph. D. in Theology from the University of Edinburgh. Over two decades into his ministry back in the U.S., he married Atlanta native Sue Ann Washington in 1977. Before long, the couple were off to Brazil, where they spent 13 years as missionaries along the mighty Amazon River.
In the 1990s, Bob and Sue Ann moved to North Captiva Island near Fort Myers on Florida’s southwestern Gulf Coast. There, Bob continued his ministry work and, in his spare time, indulged his love of flying by constructing an airplane, a single-engine BD-4, from scratch. For 18 years, Bob carefully assembled the plane in his yard and was nearing completion when he passed away at 93 in April 2018.
“He loved it. He always enjoyed working on it,” Sue Ann told WINK News. “Right up until he couldn’t, he’d come down and do this or that on it.”
Weaponizing an Ordinance Against a Property Owner
Sue Ann now has to deal with two local busybodies who have nothing else better to do than use a county nuisance ordinance to force the widow to remove Bob’s plane from her property. She recently received a notice of Nuisance Accumulation Violation from Lee County and will have to defend the presence of the plane on her property at a hearing on September 28. The county ordinance defines Nuisance Accumulation as “garbage, refuse, trash, rubbish, inoperable vehicles, or abandoned or lost property.” Bob’s plane violates none of this. Furthermore, the ordinance is designed to protect the “health, peace and safety of the community.” Bob’s plane in no way undermines thi s goal.
On the contrary, the plane, which is backed partly into the woods of her vacant lot adjacent to Sue Ann’s home, has become a popular attraction for residents and tourists alike. Many of them like to have their picture taken standing in front of the plane. None of her neighbors objects to it; in fact, they openly support Sue Ann’s right to keep the plane on her property. What’s more, the island has an air strip which is regularly used by 35 limited partner-owners. It’s not uncommon for people flying in to park their planes in front of their homes. No one objects.
And what of the couple who lodged the complaint against Sue Ann with the county? Neither of them currently lives on North Captiva Island.
If Lee County orders Sue Ann to remove the plane from her property, it would have to be at her expense. There is no bridge connecting the island to the mainland. The island is served by a water taxi which takes people to nearby Pine Island, where there is a bridge connecting to the mainland. This means Sue Ann would have to pay to have the plane’s wings removed, loaded onto a barge, taken to the mainland, and disposed of…somewhere. This would be a travesty to scrap 40 years of her husband’s work building this Experimental Class BD-4 airplane that has been a part of their married life together.
Petition Drive in Support of Sue Ann Cousar
Outraged over the misuse of the county’s ordinance against Sue Ann, her neighbors have launched a petition in support of her. The petition will be presented to the county at the September 28 hearing. Readers can show their solidarity with Sue Ann by signing the petition, which is here.
The threat to Sue Ann Cousar’s husband’s memory is no way to treat the widow of a WW II vet.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-16--No blood for oil!

No blood for oil!

“ No blood for oil !
” was the chant 30 years ago in opposition to the pending Persian Gulf War .
Opponents of going to war in the Middle East did not want American soldiers to die for the free flow of oil at market prices which sustained America ’ s economy and living standards .
The United States has steadily become energy independent in recent years , but our dependence on foreign oil may soon return .
American conflicts in the Middle East for oil have become far less likely since the U.S. produces much more of its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation still imports oil , America ’ s domestic production and exports of petroleum have resulted in the lowest net imports since 1954 , according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration .
No longer is the U.S. dependent on foreign oil imports , most of which came from Arab nations in southwest Asia , and which influenced so much of our foreign and military policies for two generations .
America ’ s dependence on foreign oil may not be a thing of the past .
We may become dependent on imports if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposal from the Joe Biden-Bernie Sanders Unity Task Force takes effect .
The Biden-Bernie climate plan would sharply curtail oil and natural gas development and expand “ renewable ” energy mandates .
For example , the plan proposes to eliminate net new carbon emissions from power plants in 15 years and all net new carbon emissions by 2050 .
One way to fulfill this goal is the proposed ban on development of oil and gas on federal lands .
The problem with implementing these promises is that “ renewable ” energy from wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not replace fossil fuels that quickly , if ever .
As filmmaker Michael Moore reminded us , renewable energy is dependent on fossil fuels , both for its manufacture and operation .
What happens when fossil fuel production is shutdown to meet mandatory usage quotas for solar and wind energy ?
Several things will occur , as California reminds us , including blackouts and brownouts , higher energy prices and reliance on imported fuel to meet energy demand .
California in 2019 imported millions of barrels of oil from other nations , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from within its state borders ( putting more Americans to work ) , and off its long Pacific coastline .
Other states with green energy plans have closed off or will ban energy sources from within , only to purchase more energy from other states .
For example , New York has long purchased fracked natural gas from Pennsylvania even as it maintains a ban on fracking its vast upstate shale deposits .
Nationwide Green New Deal mandates that close off oil , gas and nuclear energy sources will necessarily force greater energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cars , homes and businesses since renewable sources can not make up the loss .
The American Petroleum Institute ( API ) last week warned in a report that if the Biden-Bernie energy proposals take effect , one million American energy jobs would be lost as early as 2022 , the U.S. will increase importation of oil by two million barrels daily by 2030 , and household energy costs will increase by cumulatively by $ 19 billion by then .
It may seem easy to dismiss admonitions about banning domestic energy from an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But shooting the messenger does not dispel the logic and implications of the laws of economics in that less fossil fuel energy development , explicit in the Biden-Bernie plan , means fewer domestic jobs , more oil imports and higher energy costs for American consumers .
When “ renewable ” energy fails to make up the loss from fossil fuel sources , the energy has to come from somewhere – except this is no longer about one state “ importing ” energy from another .
Rather , it ’ s America having to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again on other nations .
America ’ s decades-long political and military involvement in the Middle East was primarily about two issues : protecting Israel against its Arab and Persian enemies and accessing sufficient oil supplies to sustain its economy and middle class .
Thousands of American G.I.s have died in this effort .
Times have changed for the better : Israel is making formal and informal peace with more Arab countries and America is no longer dependent on Middle Eastern oil since we produce enough of our own .
The API report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ producing less domestic energy .
Renewable energy can and should be developed , but it need not be at the price of millions of American jobs , higher energy costs , renewed dependence on foreign oil , and the risk of ensuing military conflict .

“No blood for oil!” was the chant 30 years ago in opposition to the pending Persian Gulf War. Opponents of going to war in the Middle East did not want American soldiers to die for the free flow of oil at market prices which sustained America’s economy and living standards.
The United States has steadily become energy independent in recent years, but our dependence on foreign oil may soon return.
American conflicts in the Middle East for oil have become far less likely since the U.S. produces much more of its oil and natural gas. While the nation still imports oil, America’s domestic production and exports of petroleum have resulted in the lowest net imports since 1954, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
No longer is the U.S. dependent on foreign oil imports, most of which came from Arab nations in southwest Asia, and which influenced so much of our foreign and military policies for two generations.
America’s dependence on foreign oil may not be a thing of the past. We may become dependent on imports if the latest “Green New Deal” climate proposal from the Joe Biden-Bernie Sanders Unity Task Force takes effect.
The Biden-Bernie climate plan would sharply curtail oil and natural gas development and expand “renewable” energy mandates. For example, the plan proposes to eliminate net new carbon emissions from power plants in 15 years and all net new carbon emissions by 2050. One way to fulfill this goal is the proposed ban on development of oil and gas on federal lands.
The problem with implementing these promises is that “renewable” energy from wind, solar, batteries and biomass will not replace fossil fuels that quickly, if ever. As filmmaker Michael Moore reminded us, renewable energy is dependent on fossil fuels, both for its manufacture and operation.
What happens when fossil fuel production is shutdown to meet mandatory usage quotas for solar and wind energy? Several things will occur, as California reminds us, including blackouts and brownouts, higher energy prices and reliance on imported fuel to meet energy demand. California in 2019 imported millions of barrels of oil from other nations, even though it could access more such energy from within its state borders (putting more Americans to work), and off its long Pacific coastline.
Other states with green energy plans have closed off or will ban energy sources from within, only to purchase more energy from other states. For example, New York has long purchased fracked natural gas from Pennsylvania even as it maintains a ban on fracking its vast upstate shale deposits.
Nationwide Green New Deal mandates that close off oil, gas and nuclear energy sources will necessarily force greater energy imports from other countries to power our cars, homes and businesses since renewable sources cannot make up the loss.
The American Petroleum Institute (API) last week warned in a report that if the Biden-Bernie energy proposals take effect, one million American energy jobs would be lost as early as 2022, the U.S. will increase importation of oil by two million barrels daily by 2030, and household energy costs will increase by cumulatively by $19 billion by then.
It may seem easy to dismiss admonitions about banning domestic energy from an organization that represents fossil fuel interests. But shooting the messenger does not dispel the logic and implications of the laws of economics in that less fossil fuel energy development, explicit in the Biden-Bernie plan, means fewer domestic jobs, more oil imports and higher energy costs for American consumers.
When “renewable” energy fails to make up the loss from fossil fuel sources, the energy has to come from somewhere – except this is no longer about one state “importing” energy from another. Rather, it’s America having to significantly increase energy imports and become dependent again on other nations.
America’s decades-long political and military involvement in the Middle East was primarily about two issues: protecting Israel against its Arab and Persian enemies and accessing sufficient oil supplies to sustain its economy and middle class. Thousands of American G.I.s have died in this effort.
Times have changed for the better: Israel is making formal and informal peace with more Arab countries and America is no longer dependent on Middle Eastern oil since we produce enough of our own.
The API report has documented a legitimate economic warning from producing less domestic energy. Renewable energy can and should be developed, but it need not be at the price of millions of American jobs, higher energy costs, renewed dependence on foreign oil, and the risk of ensuing military conflict.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-16--Return of the tiger: Wildlife conservation amidst rapid economic development

One of the biggest push backs to economic development today is that it destroys nature .
Radical organizations like Extinction Rebellions label capitalism and agriculture as evil .
More specifically , they blame the fossil fuel industry and the rapid industrialization for the loss of ecosystems and habitats .
On September 10 , 2020 , the Guardian UK ran an article which stated “ Wildlife populations are in freefall around the world , driven by human overconsumption , population growth and intensive agriculture.
” But is wildlife conservation possible in the midst of economic development , increased resource utilization , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ India has shown that it is possible .
During the last two decades , both conservation and economic development have been made possible in India .
The country ’ s Tiger population and the total forest area have increased despite rapid industrialization and urbanization across the country .
Tiger is a keystone species , and thus very important for conservation efforts , as a healthy tiger population ( and the protection of its habitat by armed guards ) ensures the protection of the ecosystem from illegal exploitation .
In India , tigers were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of centuries of hunting .
Between 1990 and 2006 , the tiger population plummeted dramatically .
India had merely 1411 tigers in .
However , as per the ( 2018 ) , India has 2967 tigers , which represents 70 % of all the tigers in the world .
The increase in population has been staggering .
In the 10 years ( 2008 to 2018 ) , the number has doubled .
There has been a 33 % increase in the tiger population between 2014 and 2018 .
With a string of efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increase in their population is expected in the coming years .
And it is not just the tigers .
The total forest area in India has also been increasing in recent years .
Data from a recent forest survey show that the forest cover has increased by 0.56 % between 2017 and 2019 .
There has also been an increase in overall tree cover in the country .
Yet , all we hear in the mainstream media is the destruction of forests and habitats , especially because of coal mine expansions .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the revival of the Tiger population occurred during a phase when the the population of the country increased by 152 million ( 2008-2018 ) .
Besides the increase number of people , the quality of life also increased dramatically .
The country ’ s GDP grew 7.1 percent per year ( on average ) between 2008 and 2018 .
The life expectancy rate increased from 65 to 69 in those 10 years .
This rapid growth in GDP and the improvement in living standards was assisted by the strong coal sector , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country ’ s primary energy needs .
Together with oil and gas , the fossil fuel sector contributes 87 % of all energy consumed in the country .
Overall , India ’ s growth was a stable one , involving a rapid expansion of industries , cities , and increased utilization of natural resources , especially from forest areas .
Despite this rapid development , around 300 million in the country still live in abject poverty .
Further , the recent COVID-19 lockdown has caused millions to fall back into the poverty category @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 1.3 billion people to cater to , India will not be compromising on its developmental goals .
The successful numbers of Tiger population and the increase in forest area will only strengthen its confidence in its ability to conserve wildlife whiles pursuing an energy intensive economic development policy .
India ’ s Tigers are not alone in the conservation success story .
The Arctic countries , collectively , have been partly responsible for the revival of the Polar bear numbers in the Arctic .
Polar bear numbers remained stable since 2005 amidst @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In Canada ’ s Nunavut province , their population grew so much that the local authorities requested for an increase in Polar bear killing quota that will allow the indigenous Inuit people to cull more bears .
These are just a few examples .
There are hundreds of critically endangered species that still require our attention to bounce back from their dismal population numbers .
However , the need for conservation of these species should not be used as an excuse to stop developmental projects that act as a lifeline of resource supply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Policy makers and the official environmental departments of various countries must steer themselves clear of extreme radical environmentalist lobby groups that tend to suppress the resource demand in the name of conservation .
The success story of India—with its population of 1.3 billion—proves that conservation is possible in the midst of economic development , provided policy makers adopt a development-centric approach with due diligence to the needs of conservation .

One of the biggest push backs to economic development today is that it destroys nature. Radical organizations like Extinction Rebellions label capitalism and agriculture as evil. More specifically, they blame the fossil fuel industry and the rapid industrialization for the loss of ecosystems and habitats.
On September 10, 2020, the Guardian UK ran an article which stated “Wildlife populations are in freefall around the world, driven by human overconsumption, population growth and intensive agriculture.”
But is wildlife conservation possible in the midst of economic development, increased resource utilization, and population growth?
The scenario in India has shown that it is possible. During the last two decades, both conservation and economic development have been made possible in India. The country’s Tiger population and the total forest area have increased despite rapid industrialization and urbanization across the country.
Increasing Tiger Population and Forest Area
Tiger is a keystone species, and thus very important for conservation efforts, as a healthy tiger population (and the protection of its habitat by armed guards) ensures the protection of the ecosystem from illegal exploitation.
In India, tigers were pushed to the brink of extinction because of centuries of hunting. Between 1990 and 2006, the tiger population plummeted dramatically. India had merely 1411 tigers in 2008 .
However, as per the most recent census (2018), India has 2967 tigers, which represents 70% of all the tigers in the world. The increase in population has been staggering. In the 10 years (2008 to 2018), the number has doubled. There has been a 33% increase in the tiger population between 2014 and 2018. With a string of efforts undertaken to protect them, a further increase in their population is expected in the coming years.
And it is not just the tigers. The total forest area in India has also been increasing in recent years. Data from a recent forest survey show that the forest cover has increased by 0.56% between 2017 and 2019. There has also been an increase in overall tree cover in the country. Yet, all we hear in the mainstream media is the destruction of forests and habitats, especially because of coal mine expansions.
Rapid Urbanization and Industrial Expansion
In perspective, this increase in forest cover and the revival of the Tiger population occurred during a phase when the the population of the country increased by 152 million (2008-2018). Besides the increase number of people, the quality of life also increased dramatically.
The country’s GDP grew 7.1 percent per year (on average) between 2008 and 2018. The life expectancy rate increased from 65 to 69 in those 10 years. This rapid growth in GDP and the improvement in living standards was assisted by the strong coal sector, which contributes around 75% of the country’s primary energy needs. Together with oil and gas, the fossil fuel sector contributes 87% of all energy consumed in the country.
Overall, India’s growth was a stable one, involving a rapid expansion of industries, cities, and increased utilization of natural resources, especially from forest areas.
Despite this rapid development, around 300 million in the country still live in abject poverty. Further, the recent COVID-19 lockdown has caused millions to fall back into the poverty category.
With the persistent challenge of poverty and 1.3 billion people to cater to, India will not be compromising on its developmental goals. The successful numbers of Tiger population and the increase in forest area will only strengthen its confidence in its ability to conserve wildlife whiles pursuing an energy intensive economic development policy.
India’s Tigers are not alone in the conservation success story. The Arctic countries, collectively, have been partly responsible for the revival of the Polar bear numbers in the Arctic. Polar bear numbers remained stable since 2005 amidst contrary claims in the popular media. In Canada’s Nunavut province, their population grew so much that the local authorities requested for an increase in Polar bear killing quota that will allow the indigenous Inuit people to cull more bears.
These are just a few examples. There are hundreds of critically endangered species that still require our attention to bounce back from their dismal population numbers. However, the need for conservation of these species should not be used as an excuse to stop developmental projects that act as a lifeline of resource supply to the growing population across the globe. Policy makers and the official environmental departments of various countries must steer themselves clear of extreme radical environmentalist lobby groups that tend to suppress the resource demand in the name of conservation. The success story of India—with its population of 1.3 billion—proves that conservation is possible in the midst of economic development, provided policy makers adopt a development-centric approach with due diligence to the needs of conservation.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-15--Full scale assault from team climate

Full scale assault from team climate

First of all , this is the worst wildfire disaster for California , parts of Oregon and Washington .
But in classic form , people that wish to exploit this , like the Australian Wildfires do not even look at the bigger picture they claim to be ( Globally ) .
In addition they ignore the fact the very policies they believe in can cause the problem to be worse .
All this is swept under a rug , Never Let a Crisis go to Waste .
Classic example : People like this understand we have increasingly become a society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and does from time to time , rather than one that reaches beyond its grasp to climb even higher .
We long for safety and security from all around us ( though one may argue from mobs that wish to disrupt , if not destroy your life , safety is not an issue .
Seems like that is more of a man-made issue than something as vast as the climate ) .
But when it comes to man-made climate change hysteria , the Lyrics from one of my Favorite Bocelli Songs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Solo Rischiando tu Vivrai ” ( only by risking , will you live ) That is a. fading memory as far as the thinking of a lot of people today .
And so they crave safety and are open to those that claim they know and close their minds to options that may challenge that Ben Franklins quote : “ Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety , deserve neither liberty nor safety ” seems appropriate , though I seriously doubt many of the current people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone has to “ save ” us , and if its not God , or stepping to a higher calling , then the smartest among us must lead us to “ safety ” right ?
And since there is safety in numbers , all must be hoarded together in the march , and those that won ’ t , well you can see each day what is becoming of them .
We are dealing with a record breaking horrible fire season in the western states of California Oregon and Washington .
And I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cruel by bringing up , that for the NATION AS A WHOLE , Acreage burnt was much greater in the early 20th century .
This year may indeed be number one out of the last 10 years , but here are the stats so far .
The western states though are disproportionately high and making up a large part of this years total .
But overall , this clearly indicates there is NO CLEAR TREND , just up and down and in terms of totality , very much less than the 1930s .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was 1/5th of the overall record .
Finally , here is where there is a clear signal from man , but not in the way Newsom , etal , are pushing this with their manmade climate change ideas : This does not diminish what is going on .
It is just that if you are going to tell me this is all globally happening , then how is it that its obviously regionalized ?
The above chart shows up and down the past 10 years , but even assuming this will be the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not beat earlier years when there were less man made fires because population was not as great or out in areas where a smoldering campfire could ignite a whole forest .
BTW , the MJO may have a lot to do with this as the same signal that shuts down the Pacific basin with large scale sinking air ( the Atlantic tries to take up the slack means its very often drier in the west like this .
Now how about this headline .
From the Wall Street Journal I would expect better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ LOOKED AT THE TOTAL ACE OF THE SEASON , WHICH SHOWS HOW WEAK THESE STORMS ARE ?
I have pointed this out countless times and even wrote about why a much more advanced evaluation tool has to be developed to objectively evaluate these storms ( which I have out ) rather than just saying , we have a lot of names and so that ’ s a sign of the season .
I call some of these storms ham sandwiches ( as in you can name a ham sandwich if you want ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ via satellite estimates , get a name , and the media goes wild .
Dr Phil Klotzbach , and I have no idea what his feeling is on AGW and hurricanes , has the go to site for this The eastern and Western Pacific , home to the most global tropical activity are in contention FOR RECORD LOW YEARS .
Let that sink in .
The Atlantic basin , home of what may be 20 storms at the end of this week , including one that could be a nightmare on the central @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do stall or crawl , Harvey and Florence for example , but neither can touch Flora in 1963 which dumped over 100 inches of rain on eastern Cuba ) has an ace just slightly above average and the ACE/STORM is currently 2CND LOWEST ON RECORD .
Its because short lived minimal storms are getting named .
As per previous blogs , it only matters where they go and how strong they are when they get there and we knew back in April when we issued this what was going to happen I will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the central gulf coast , and believe me our clients have been aware of this threat due to the pattern for over a week .
Its not rocket science or brain surgery , its studying the past for the hint at the future Now how about this headline : Earth barreling toward ‘ Hothouse ’ state not seen in 50 million years , epic new climate record shows Epic “ new ” record .
Yah that ’ s the ticket .
Lets throw out past research and replace with it with epic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anti science right , that I don ’ t believe the latest research cause not only am I a denier , but I am a climate cretin ( Heh , they should use that..you science denying climate cretin… there take that ) .
So , do we throw out the long-standing Geological records that show our climate emergency is actually a climate optimum ?
Of course , throw this out , erase what is not convenient .
And by the way “ barreling ” and “ hot house ” ?
This is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though until the year is over and UAH satellite data comes in with Dr Roy Spencer , perhaps it takes over , but I doubt it , we can ’ t yet say for sure .
But its because one large warm area is outdueling the cool while a large part of the planet , where most people live , are well within small ranges , both warm and cold : Of course the warming in that area does have repercussions , one of which may be a bitterly cold winter in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Canadas colder seasons have been cooling a bit ) .
BTW , the vast majority of warming is in the arctic winters , which can be linked to water vapor increase , not CO2 .
The warming of the oceans , which can be due to many natural causes , is a key player in a lot of this ) as it outsources water vapor which has a bigger effect on temperatures the lower and the drier the air , hence the arctic areas and b ) outsources CO2 .
I have opined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ limit it here , but what is warming the oceans is not a slam dunk man is the cause issue , by a long shot .
When you see words like hottest and barreling or whatever they are meant to enlist emotion and fear , not objective evaluation with a mind for perspective .
And of course you get people blaming weird weather on climate change .
The climate always changes .
But there are counters that are ignored .
Solutions , if there is a fear that needs to be addressed ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economically and environmentally sound ones , like planting more trees , building more nuclear power plants , etc ) are simply thrown under the bus .
Even if the bus is clean burning natural gas , which if one reads the lefts Green New Deal , has to be gotten rid of too .
But fear not , we will all be taken care of .
Just turn your fear over to those smarter than you , and you will be just fine .
Yah .
That ’ s the ticket .

First of all, this is the worst wildfire disaster for California, parts of Oregon and Washington. But in classic form, people that wish to exploit this, like the Australian Wildfires do not even look at the bigger picture they claim to be (Globally). In addition they ignore the fact the very policies they believe in can cause the problem to be worse. All this is swept under a rug,
Never Let a Crisis go to Waste. Classic example:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/11/gavin-newsom-at-ash-strewn-wildfire-site-the-debate-is-over-around-climate-change/
People like this understand we have increasingly become a society based on fear of what could happen, and does from time to time, rather than one that reaches beyond its grasp to climb even higher. We long for safety and security from all around us (though one may argue from mobs that wish to disrupt, if not destroy your life, safety is not an issue. Seems like that is more of a man-made issue than something as vast as the climate). But when it comes to man-made climate change hysteria, the Lyrics from one of my Favorite Bocelli Songs, Un Nuovo Giorno no longer aply: “ Solo Rischiando tu Vivrai” ( only by risking, will you live) That is a. fading memory as far as the thinking of a lot of people today. And so they crave safety and are open to those that claim they know and close their minds to options that may challenge that
Ben Franklins quote: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety” seems appropriate, though I seriously doubt many of the current people pushing this even know this quote
Afterall someone has to “save” us, and if its not God, or stepping to a higher calling, then the smartest among us must lead us to “safety” right? And since there is safety in numbers, all must be hoarded together in the march, and those that won’t, well you can see each day what is becoming of them.
We are dealing with a record breaking horrible fire season in the western states of California Oregon and Washington. And I will be accused of being heartless and cruel by bringing up, that for the NATION AS A WHOLE, Acreage burnt was much greater in the early 20th century.
This year may indeed be number one out of the last 10 years, but here are the stats so far. The western states though are disproportionately high and making up a large part of this years total.
But overall, this clearly indicates there is NO CLEAR TREND, just up and down and in terms of totality ,very much less than the 1930s. In fact the record year of 2017 was 1/5th of the overall record.
Finally,here is where there is a clear signal from man, but not in the way Newsom, etal, are pushing this with their manmade climate change ideas:
This does not diminish what is going on. It is just that if you are going to tell me this is all globally happening, then how is it that its obviously regionalized? The above chart shows up and down the past 10 years, but even assuming this will be the biggest, for the nation it does not beat earlier years when there were less man made fires because population was not as great or out in areas where a smoldering campfire could ignite a whole forest.
BTW, the MJO may have a lot to do with this as the same signal that shuts down the Pacific basin with large scale sinking air ( the Atlantic tries to take up the slack means its very often drier in the west like this.
Now how about this headline. From the Wall Street Journal
https://www.wsj.com/articles/hurricane-season-is-so-bad-that-we-are-running-out-of-names-11599841440
I would expect better out of the journal. Have they LOOKED AT THE TOTAL ACE OF THE SEASON, WHICH SHOWS HOW WEAK THESE STORMS ARE? I have pointed this out countless times and even wrote about why a much more advanced evaluation tool has to be developed to objectively evaluate these storms ( which I have out) rather than just saying, we have a lot of names and so that’s a sign of the season. I call some of these storms ham sandwiches (as in you can name a ham sandwich if you want) . They barely get to storm intensity via satellite estimates, get a name, and the media goes wild. Dr Phil Klotzbach, and I have no idea what his feeling is on AGW and hurricanes, has the go to site for this
http://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/
The eastern and Western Pacific, home to the most global tropical activity are in contention FOR RECORD LOW YEARS. Let that sink in. The Atlantic basin, home of what may be 20 storms at the end of this week, including one that could be a nightmare on the central gulf coast if it stalls ( storms do stall or crawl, Harvey and Florence for example, but neither can touch Flora in 1963 which dumped over 100 inches of rain on eastern Cuba) has an ace just slightly above average and the ACE/STORM is currently 2CND LOWEST ON RECORD. Its because short lived minimal storms are getting named. As per previous blogs, it only matters where they go and how strong they are when they get there and we knew back in April when we issued this what was going to happen
I will add another verification to that this week on the central gulf coast, and believe me our clients have been aware of this threat due to the pattern for over a week.
Its not rocket science or brain surgery, its studying the past for the hint at the future
Now how about this headline:
Earth barreling toward ‘Hothouse’ state not seen in 50 million years, epic new climate record shows
Epic “new” record. Yah that’s the ticket. Lets throw out past research and replace with it with epic new ones. Of course that sounds anti science right, that I don’t believe the latest research cause not only am I a denier, but I am a climate cretin ( Heh, they should use that..you science denying climate cretin… there take that). So, do we throw out the long-standing Geological records that show our climate emergency is actually a climate optimum?
Of course, throw this out, erase what is not convenient.
And by the way “barreling” and “hot house”?
This is the second warmest year in the satellite era, though until the year is over and UAH satellite data comes in with Dr Roy Spencer, perhaps it takes over, but I doubt it, we can’t yet say for sure. But its because one large warm area is outdueling the cool while a large part of the planet, where most people live, are well within small ranges, both warm and cold:
Of course the warming in that area does have repercussions, one of which may be a bitterly cold winter in much of Canada to counter. (Canadas colder seasons have been cooling a bit). BTW,the vast majority of warming is in the arctic winters, which can be linked to water vapor increase, not CO2.
The warming of the oceans, which can be due to many natural causes, is a key player in a lot of this) as it outsources water vapor which has a bigger effect on temperatures the lower and the drier the air, hence the arctic areas and b) outsources CO2. I have opined on this many times before and will limit it here, but what is warming the oceans is not a slam dunk man is the cause issue, by a long shot.
When you see words like hottest and barreling or whatever they are meant to enlist emotion and fear, not objective evaluation with a mind for perspective.
And of course you get people blaming weird weather on climate change. The climate always changes. But there are counters that are ignored. Solutions, if there is a fear that needs to be addressed (adaptation for one, or very simple economically and environmentally sound ones, like planting more trees, building more nuclear power plants, etc) are simply thrown under the bus. Even if the bus is clean burning natural gas, which if one reads the lefts Green New Deal, has to be gotten rid of too.
But fear not, we will all be taken care of. Just turn your fear over to those smarter than you, and you will be just fine. Yah. That’s the ticket.


“Weaponizing the weather”

Politicians are abandoning science and “ weaponizing the weather , ” hoping to gain advantage in the upcoming election .
Joe Biden read a speech laden with the most outrageously extreme talking points in the global warming playbook .
CFACT rapidly laid out the facts that take climate exaggerations down .
Marc Morano continued CFACT ’ s debunking of Biden ’ s science mistakes on the Tucker Carlson show .
“ What Joe Biden said is you can vote yourself better weather , President Obama said the same thing in 2012 and people did vote for him .
They voted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we still have extreme weather .
So voting for Obama didn ’ t help and I don ’ t know how voting for Biden is going to stop extreme weather.
” “ This is climate ambulance chasing at its core , weaponizing weather events to say , look.
’ There ’ s a bad weather event here and we need a Green New Deal.
’ They are using science to lobby for Politics .
Vote for me and I will make the weather better.
” “ They just want you to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he actually said we will all die if we don ’ t stop fossil fuel use and he wants to put fossil fuel executives in jail — but meanwhile he ’ s still using private jets.
” CFACT ’ s important new film Climate Hustle 2 : Rise of the Climate Monarchy will expose shameless tricks like blaming natural extreme weather on climate change during our worldwide streaming event on September 24th .
Tucker Carlson told Marc on the air , “ Climate Hustle 2 — I ’ m going to watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ September 24th at 8 PM .

Politicians are abandoning science and “weaponizing the weather,” hoping to gain advantage in the upcoming election.
Joe Biden read a speech laden with the most outrageously extreme talking points in the global warming playbook.
CFACT rapidly laid out the facts that take climate exaggerations down.
Marc Morano continued CFACT’s debunking of Biden’s science mistakes on the Tucker Carlson show.
Watch Marc in action at Climate Depot:
“What Joe Biden said is you can vote yourself better weather, President Obama said the same thing in 2012 and people did vote for him. They voted him back in, but guess what, we still have extreme weather. So voting for Obama didn’t help and I don’t know how voting for Biden is going to stop extreme weather.”
“This is climate ambulance chasing at its core, weaponizing weather events to say, look.’ There’s a bad weather event here and we need a Green New Deal.’ They are using science to lobby for Politics. Vote for me and I will make the weather better.”
“They just want you to be afraid. In the case of Biden, he actually said we will all die if we don’t stop fossil fuel use and he wants to put fossil fuel executives in jail — but meanwhile he’s still using private jets.”
CFACT’s important new film Climate Hustle 2: Rise of the Climate Monarchy will expose shameless tricks like blaming natural extreme weather on climate change during our worldwide streaming event on September 24th.
Tucker Carlson told Marc on the air, “Climate Hustle 2 — I’m going to watch that.”
You should, too — September 24th at 8 PM.
Help CFACT shield the public from weaponized
weather with facts. Spread the word!
September 24th at 8 PM anywhere on Earth Get tickets now!


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-18--Solar panels generate mountains of waste — and heat the planet

The problem of solar panel waste is now becoming evident .
As environmental journalist Emily Folk admits in Renewable Energy Magazine , “ when talking about renewable energy , the topic of waste does not often appear.
” She attributes this to the supposed “ pressures of climate change ” and alleged “ urgency to find alternative energy sources , ” saying people may thus be hesitant to discuss “ possible negative impacts of renewable energy.
” Ms .
Folk admits that sustainability requires proper e-waste management .
Yet she laments , “ Solar presents a particular problem .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ toxic pollutants … [ and ] increasing concern regarding what happens with these materials when they are no longer viable , especially since they are difficult to recycle.
” This is the likely reason that ( except in Washington state ) , there are no U.S. mandates for solar recycling .
A recent article in Grist reports that most used solar panels are shipped to developing countries that have little electricity and weak environmental protections , to be reused or landfilled .
The near-total absence of end-of-life procedures for solar panels is likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repeated , unsupported assertion ) that renewable energy is “ clean ” and “ green.
” Indeed , Mississippi Sierra Club state director Louie Miller recently claimed that unlike fossil fuels and nuclear energy , “ Sunshine is a free fuel.
” Well , sunshine is certainly free and clean .
However , there is a monumental caveat .
Harnessing sunshine ( and wind ) to serve humanity is not free – or clean , green , renewable or sustainable .
The 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act mandates that new surface @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funds for full reclamation of mine properties .
The law also sets standards for restoring abandoned mine lands .
There is nothing akin to this for solar facilities and wastes .
Similarly , the 1980 Superfund law ( Comprehensive Environmental Response , Compensation and Liability Act ) created a tax and trust fund to pay for preventing and fixing actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances that could endanger public health or the environment .
Again , still nothing for solar .
The 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act prioritizes deep geologic repositories for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Unfortunately , 25 years after being designated as the disposal site , Nevada ’ s Yucca Mountain , has never opened , because of conflicts among politicians , locals , anti-nuclear activists , government officials and the nuclear industry ; the U.S. still stores its nuclear waste at 75 scattered sites , including some near New York City , New Orleans and Chicago .
But for solar no steps have been taken .
While coal , nuclear , and petrochemical companies must come up with detailed , costly plans for dealing with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ operations , solar ( and wind ) companies have been “ rewarded ” with massive subsidies and absolutely no disposal standards or requirements .
No government grants require that solar companies set aside money to dispose of , store or recycle wastes generated during manufacturing or after massive solar “ farms ” have ceased functioning and been torn down .
Solar ( and wind ) customers are likewise not charged for waste cleanup , disposal , or reuse and recycling .
This and the massive subsidies distort and hide the true costs of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to catch up .
Disposal ( or recycling ) costs will have to be paid , ultimately by consumers .
The more solar panels we have ( likely billions within a few years ) , the higher those costs will be .
Consumers in states like California that have committed to heavy reliance on solar ( and wind ) energy ( and already have the nation ’ s highest energy bills ) will have to pay even more .
California is also facing a secondary problem from the proliferation of subsidized industrial solar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stanford University and the Carnegie Institution for Science found that nearly a third of the state ’ s solar development is occurring on former cropland , where many farmers are shifting from growing crops to using their land to generate electricity – rather than letting it become wildlife habitat .
As Big Solar also moves into natural areas , California is losing even more habitat and scenic land , while the integrity of state and national parks suffers from the nearby glare of countless solar panels and towering transmission lines to distant cities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : localized higher temperatures .
It found it will take an area the size of South Carolina filled with solar arrays to meet California ’ s goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions 80 % below 1990 levels by 2050 .
[ It would take at least eight South Carolinas if the California mandate were extended nationwide . ]
Other research has found that these large-scale solar power plants raise local temperatures , creating a significant solar heat island effect .
Temperatures around one solar power plant were 5.4o-7.2 °F ( 3o-4°C ) warmer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ global warming ” across 20 million acres ( South Carolina ) or 160 million acres ( Texas ) , to meet California or U.S. greenhouse gas reduction goals !
Australia is already coping with this unwelcome reality .
Not until 2018 did Aussie environment ministers mandate fast-track development of new product stewardship schemes for photovoltaic ( PV ) solar panels , like those television and computer manufacturers and retailers have had to comply with since 2011 .
Total Environment Centre director Jeff Angel admitted that setting standards for life-of-product management for solar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that the 30-year delay in imposing standards revealed a “ fundamental weakness ” in Australia ’ s waste policies .
He further noted that while solar panels contain hazardous substances , Aussies are “ sending hundreds of thousands of e-waste items to landfills ” and creating significant pollution problems .
And Australia has less than a tenth of the U.S. population !
Since 2002 , the European Union ’ s Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment ( WEEE ) Directive has required that original producers of e-wastes guarantee and pay for taking back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end-user consumers aren ’ t surprised by additional disposal costs .
However , PV solar panel waste was not included in this mandate until July 2012 – and “ some uncertainty remains ” about the cutoff date for such wastes , because the directive has yet to be implemented in national laws .
Producer financing of PV waste treatment thus can not be applied to older solar panels .
So who will pay ?
And how much ?
Ms .
Folk and others look to waste-to-energy plants , and indeed the EU does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to incinerators – which many environmentalists oppose .
Landfilling is not a viable option in the U.S. , because toxins could leach out .
Unscrupulous companies ship solar panel waste to developing nations , but that is a stopgap solution that is environmentally irresponsible .
Tao Meng , lead author of a new study , says “ the big blind spot in the U.S. for recycling is that the cost far exceeds the revenue ” – by nearly 10-to-1 , especially when including transportation costs .
Chemicals must be used to remove silver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be safely placed in landfills , Meng notes .
The problem of solar panel waste will continue to grow as more panels reach their end of life .
Four years ago the International Renewable Energy Agency estimated there were already about 250,000 metric tons of solar panel waste worldwide – and that total will explode to 78 million metric tons by 2050 !
So when you read that solar energy is already cheaper than natural gas , don ’ t be fooled .
They are omitting the pollution and disposal costs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heat islands , and the need for backup power generation or batteries – to lowball the true costs of solar .
We need some honest math now , before it ’ s too late to turn back .

The problem of solar panel waste is now becoming evident. As environmental journalist Emily Folk admits in Renewable Energy Magazine, “when talking about renewable energy, the topic of waste does not often appear.” She attributes this to the supposed “pressures of climate change” and alleged “urgency to find alternative energy sources,” saying people may thus be hesitant to discuss “possible negative impacts of renewable energy.”
Ms. Folk admits that sustainability requires proper e-waste management. Yet she laments, “Solar presents a particular problem. There is growing evidence that broken panels release toxic pollutants … [and] increasing concern regarding what happens with these materials when they are no longer viable, especially since they are difficult to recycle.”
This is the likely reason that (except in Washington state), there are no U.S. mandates for solar recycling. A recent article in Grist reports that most used solar panels are shipped to developing countries that have little electricity and weak environmental protections, to be reused or landfilled.
The near-total absence of end-of-life procedures for solar panels is likely a byproduct of the belief (and repeated, unsupported assertion) that renewable energy is “clean” and “green.” Indeed, Mississippi Sierra Club state director Louie Miller recently claimed that unlike fossil fuels and nuclear energy, “Sunshine is a free fuel.” Well, sunshine is certainly free and clean. However, there is a monumental caveat.
Harnessing sunshine (and wind) to serve humanity is not free – or clean, green, renewable or sustainable.
The 1977 Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act mandates that new surface coal mines include plans and set aside funds for full reclamation of mine properties. The law also sets standards for restoring abandoned mine lands. There is nothing akin to this for solar facilities and wastes.
Similarly, the 1980 Superfund law (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act) created a tax and trust fund to pay for preventing and fixing actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances that could endanger public health or the environment. Again, still nothing for solar.
The 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act prioritizes deep geologic repositories for safe storage and/or disposal of radioactive waste. Unfortunately, 25 years after being designated as the disposal site, Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, has never opened, because of conflicts among politicians, locals, anti-nuclear activists, government officials and the nuclear industry; the U.S. still stores its nuclear waste at 75 scattered sites, including some near New York City, New Orleans and Chicago. But for solar no steps have been taken.
While coal, nuclear, and petrochemical companies must come up with detailed, costly plans for dealing with real or potential negative consequences of their operations, solar (and wind) companies have been “rewarded” with massive subsidies and absolutely no disposal standards or requirements.
No government grants require that solar companies set aside money to dispose of, store or recycle wastes generated during manufacturing or after massive solar “farms” have ceased functioning and been torn down. Solar (and wind) customers are likewise not charged for waste cleanup, disposal, or reuse and recycling. This and the massive subsidies distort and hide the true costs of solar power.
But reality is starting to catch up. Disposal (or recycling) costs will have to be paid, ultimately by consumers. The more solar panels we have (likely billions within a few years), the higher those costs will be. Consumers in states like California that have committed to heavy reliance on solar (and wind) energy (and already have the nation’s highest energy bills) will have to pay even more.
California is also facing a secondary problem from the proliferation of subsidized industrial solar installations. A 2015 study jointly by Stanford University and the Carnegie Institution for Science found that nearly a third of the state’s solar development is occurring on former cropland, where many farmers are shifting from growing crops to using their land to generate electricity – rather than letting it become wildlife habitat. As Big Solar also moves into natural areas, California is losing even more habitat and scenic land, while the integrity of state and national parks suffers from the nearby glare of countless solar panels and towering transmission lines to distant cities.
The Stanford study highlights another problem: localized higher temperatures. It found it will take an area the size of South Carolina filled with solar arrays to meet California’s goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. [It would take at least eight South Carolinas if the California mandate were extended nationwide.]
Other research has found that these large-scale solar power plants raise local temperatures, creating a significant solar heat island effect. Temperatures around one solar power plant were 5.4o-7.2 °F (3o-4°C) warmer than nearby wildlands. Imagine such manmade “global warming” across 20 million acres (South Carolina) or 160 million acres (Texas), to meet California or U.S. greenhouse gas reduction goals!
Australia is already coping with this unwelcome reality. Not until 2018 did Aussie environment ministers mandate fast-track development of new product stewardship schemes for photovoltaic (PV) solar panels, like those television and computer manufacturers and retailers have had to comply with since 2011.
Total Environment Centre director Jeff Angel admitted that setting standards for life-of-product management for solar panels was “long overdue,” and that the 30-year delay in imposing standards revealed a “fundamental weakness” in Australia’s waste policies. He further noted that while solar panels contain hazardous substances, Aussies are “sending hundreds of thousands of e-waste items to landfills” and creating significant pollution problems. And Australia has less than a tenth of the U.S. population!
Since 2002, the European Union’s Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive has required that original producers of e-wastes guarantee and pay for taking back and recycling their wastes, so that end-user consumers aren’t surprised by additional disposal costs.
However, PV solar panel waste was not included in this mandate until July 2012 – and “some uncertainty remains” about the cutoff date for such wastes, because the directive has yet to be implemented in national laws. Producer financing of PV waste treatment thus cannot be applied to older solar panels. So who will pay? And how much?
Ms. Folk and others look to waste-to-energy plants, and indeed the EU does send much of its solar panel waste to incinerators – which many environmentalists oppose. Landfilling is not a viable option in the U.S., because toxins could leach out. Unscrupulous companies ship solar panel waste to developing nations, but that is a stopgap solution that is environmentally irresponsible.
Tao Meng, lead author of a new study, says “the big blind spot in the U.S. for recycling is that the cost far exceeds the revenue” – by nearly 10-to-1, especially when including transportation costs. Chemicals must be used to remove silver and lead from silicon modules before they can be safely placed in landfills, Meng notes.
The problem of solar panel waste will continue to grow as more panels reach their end of life. Four years ago the International Renewable Energy Agency estimated there were already about 250,000 metric tons of solar panel waste worldwide – and that total will explode to 78 million metric tons by 2050!
So when you read that solar energy is already cheaper than natural gas, don’t be fooled. They are omitting the pollution and disposal costs, as well as habitat losses, solar heat islands, and the need for backup power generation or batteries – to lowball the true costs of solar. We need some honest math now, before it’s too late to turn back.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-19--California’s energy scorecard fails on the world stage

California , with 0.5 percent of the world ’ s population ( 40 million vs 8 billion ) professes to be the leader of everything and through its dysfunctional energy policies imports more electricity than any other state – currently at 32 percent from the Northwest and Southwest – and has forced California to be the only state in contiguous America that imports most of its crude oil energy demands from foreign country suppliers to meet the energy demands of the state .
State energy policies have made California electricity and fuel prices among the highest in the nation which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of “ energy poverty ” for the 18 million ( 45 percent of the 40 million Californians ) that represent the Hispanic and African American populations of the state .
Access to electricity is now an afterthought in most parts of the world , so it may come as a surprise to learn that 16 percent of the world ’ s population — an estimated 1.2 billion people — are still living without this basic necessity .
Lack of access to electricity , or “ energy poverty ” , is the ultimate economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the modern economy .
— over three billion people — live on less than $ 2.50 a day .
At least 80 percent of humanity , or almost 6 billion , lives on less than $ 10 a day .
Other nations and continents living in abject poverty without electricity realize California , and large parts of the U.S. buying into green new deals , renewable futures , and zero-carbon societies are left with the dystopic reality of mass homelessness , filth and rampant inequality that increasingly characterize the GND core values @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 7.8 billion is projected to reach 9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100 .
Over the last 100 years , climate-related deaths in developed countries have decreased by 95 percent , mostly attributable to the use of fossil fuels and the products made from petroleum derivatives , that have lifted more than a billion people out of poverty in just the past twenty-five years .
We can thank fossil fuels and capitalism for that and more .
Currently , underdeveloped countries , mostly from energy starved countries , are experiencing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which more than 70 per cent are attributable to six causes : diarrhea , malaria , neonatal infection , pneumonia , preterm delivery , or lack of oxygen at birth .
About 29,000 children under the age of five – 21 each minute – die every day , mainly from preventable causes .
When you include fatalities of “ other than children ” the world numbers get even worse… • More than 8,000,000 world cancer deaths per year .
• 5,000,000 tobacco related deaths per year , and current trends show that tobacco @ @ @ @ @ @ @ annually by 2030 .
• 3,800,000 deaths every year as a result of household exposure to .
• 2,300,000 women and men around the world or diseases every year per .
After that slice of morbidity I ’ d like to present a tad of relatively good news as to why the world is looking at the safety of nuclear power reactors .
The worldwide total of – not annually , but from inception of nuclear – including Three Mile Island ( March 1979 ) , Chernobyl ( April 1986 ) and Fukushima @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 200 .
As a result of safety and ability to provide continuous uninterruptable zero emission electricity , today there are about operating in 30 countries around the world with 50 more under construction .
Significant further capacity is being created by plant upgrading of existing reactors .
Additionally , there are that have accumulated 12,000 reactor years of “ safe ” marine operation .
Even China , with thousands of coal-fired power plants , already has 46 nuclear reactors in operation and 11 more under construction to provide continuous uninterruptible zero-emission electricity .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ nuclear power plants to generate zero emission electricity .
In 2016 , natural gas-fired generators accounted for 42 % of the operating electricity generating capacity in the United States with 200 more set to open .
• California ’ s goal is ZERO natural gas power plants to generate continuous uninterruptable electricity .
• California ’ s green goals are to only rely on intermittent electricity from wind and solar and hope that the Northwestern and Southwestern states can generate enough extra power to meet the electricity demands of the 5th largest economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world and other American states focused on providing continuous uninterruptable electricity , and the more than 6,000 products made from petroleum derivatives for use in the daily lives of their residents , we must give California a FAILING GRADE on the world stage for its energy policies .
If we continue to deny the growing poor populations the benefits of electricity , medicines , heating and countless other developments made possible by deep earth minerals and fuels , to ever achieve the lifestyle benefits afforded the climate activists , then we need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions of preventable deaths from occurring every year in third world countries .

California, with 0.5 percent of the world’s population (40 million vs 8 billion) professes to be the leader of everything and through its dysfunctional energy policies imports more electricity than any other state – currently at 32 percent from the Northwest and Southwest – and has forced California to be the only state in contiguous America that imports most of its crude oil energy demands from foreign country suppliers to meet the energy demands of the state.
State energy policies have made California electricity and fuel prices among the highest in the nation which have been contributory to the rapid growth of “energy poverty” for the 18 million (45 percent of the 40 million Californians) that represent the Hispanic and African American populations of the state.
Access to electricity is now an afterthought in most parts of the world, so it may come as a surprise to learn that 16 percent of the world’s population — an estimated 1.2 billion people — are still living without this basic necessity. Lack of access to electricity, or “energy poverty”, is the ultimate economic hindrance as it prevents people from participating in the modern economy.
Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. At least 80 percent of humanity, or almost 6 billion, lives on less than $10 a day. Other nations and continents living in abject poverty without electricity realize California, and large parts of the U.S. buying into green new deals, renewable futures, and zero-carbon societies are left with the dystopic reality of mass homelessness, filth and rampant inequality that increasingly characterize the GND core values.
Today, the current world population of 7.8 billion is projected to reach 9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100.
Over the last 100 years, climate-related deaths in developed countries have decreased by 95 percent, mostly attributable to the use of fossil fuels and the products made from petroleum derivatives, that have lifted more than a billion people out of poverty in just the past twenty-five years. We can thank fossil fuels and capitalism for that and more.
Currently, underdeveloped countries, mostly from energy starved countries, are experiencing about 11,000,000 child deaths every year of which more than 70 per cent are attributable to six causes: diarrhea, malaria, neonatal infection, pneumonia, preterm delivery, or lack of oxygen at birth. About 29,000 children under the age of five – 21 each minute – die every day, mainly from preventable causes .
When you include fatalities of “other than children” the world numbers get even worse…
After that slice of morbidity I’d like to present a tad of relatively good news as to why the world is looking at the safety of nuclear power reactors. The worldwide total of nuclear deaths – not annually, but from inception of nuclear – including Three Mile Island (March 1979), Chernobyl (April 1986) and Fukushima (March 2011) are LESS than 200.
As a result of safety and ability to provide continuous uninterruptable zero emission electricity, today there are about 440 nuclear reactors operating in 30 countries around the world with 50 more under construction. Significant further capacity is being created by plant upgrading of existing reactors. Additionally, there are 140 nuclear powered ships that have accumulated 12,000 reactor years of “safe” marine operation.
Even China, with thousands of coal-fired power plants, already has 46 nuclear reactors in operation and 11 more under construction to provide continuous uninterruptible zero-emission electricity.
California’s goal is ZERO nuclear power plants to generate zero emission electricity.
In 2016, natural gas-fired generators accounted for 42% of the operating electricity generating capacity in the United States with 200 more set to open.
California’s goal is ZERO natural gas power plants to generate continuous uninterruptable electricity.
California’s green goals are to only rely on intermittent electricity from wind and solar and hope that the Northwestern and Southwestern states can generate enough extra power to meet the electricity demands of the 5th largest economy in the world.
With countries around the world and other American states focused on providing continuous uninterruptable electricity, and the more than 6,000 products made from petroleum derivatives for use in the daily lives of their residents, we must give California a FAILING GRADE on the world stage for its energy policies.
If we continue to deny the growing poor populations the benefits of electricity, medicines, heating and countless other developments made possible by deep earth minerals and fuels, to ever achieve the lifestyle benefits afforded the climate activists, then we need to justify our reasoning for allowing those millions of preventable deaths from occurring every year in third world countries.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-19--Justices Ginsburg and Scalia riding an elephant

The sweet friendship between Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia teaches a great deal about collegiality , respect for others , and how to disagree with civility .
They vacationed together , cooked together , and attended the opera together , even appearing as “ supernumaries ” ( costumed extras ) together .
They celebrated every New Year ’ s Eve together .
They certainly would never think of trying to silence each other .
The Supreme Court ’ s collection includes this great picture of Ruth and “ Nino ” riding an elephant together in India .
Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would rather spend the rest of his time on the Court disagreeing with Professor Laurence Tribe or Governor Mario Cuomo replied , “ Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the passing of her friend Justice Antonin Scalia : Toward the end of the opera Scalia/Ginsburg , tenor Scalia and soprano Ginsburg sing a duet : ‘ We are different , we are one , ’ different in our interpretation of written texts , one in our reverence for the Constitution and the institution we serve .
From our years together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were best buddies .
We disagreed now and then , but when I wrote for the Court and received a Scalia dissent , the opinion ultimately released was notably better than my initial circulation .
Justice Scalia nailed all the weak spots—the ‘ applesauce ’ and ‘ argle bargle ’ —and gave me just what I needed to strengthen the majority opinion .
He was a jurist of captivating brilliance and wit , with a rare talent to make even the most sober judge laugh .
The press referred to his ‘ energetic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ‘ peppery prose , ’ ‘ acumen , ’ and ‘ affability , ’ all apt descriptions .
He was eminently quotable , his pungent opinions so clearly stated that his words never slipped from the reader ’ s grasp .
Justice Scalia once described as the peak of his days on the bench an evening at the Opera Ball when he joined two Washington National Opera tenors at the piano for a medley of songs .
He called it the famous Three Tenors performance .
He was , indeed , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good fortune to have known him as working colleague and treasured friend .

The sweet friendship between Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia teaches a great deal about collegiality, respect for others, and how to disagree with civility.
They vacationed together, cooked together, and attended the opera together, even appearing as “supernumaries” (costumed extras) together. They celebrated every New Year’s Eve together.
They certainly would never think of trying to silence each other.
The Supreme Court’s collection includes this great picture of Ruth and “Nino” riding an elephant together in India.
Justice Antonin Scalia, when asked whether he would rather spend the rest of his time on the Court disagreeing with Professor Laurence Tribe or Governor Mario Cuomo replied, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg.”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the passing of her friend Justice Antonin Scalia:
Toward the end of the opera Scalia/Ginsburg, tenor Scalia and soprano Ginsburg sing a duet: ‘We are different, we are one,’ different in our interpretation of written texts, one in our reverence for the Constitution and the institution we serve. From our years together at the D.C. Circuit, we were best buddies. We disagreed now and then, but when I wrote for the Court and received a Scalia dissent, the opinion ultimately released was notably better than my initial circulation. Justice Scalia nailed all the weak spots—the ‘applesauce’ and ‘argle bargle’—and gave me just what I needed to strengthen the majority opinion. He was a jurist of captivating brilliance and wit, with a rare talent to make even the most sober judge laugh. The press referred to his ‘energetic fervor,’ ‘astringent intellect,’ ‘peppery prose,’ ‘acumen,’ and ‘affability,’ all apt descriptions. He was eminently quotable, his pungent opinions so clearly stated that his words never slipped from the reader’s grasp.
Justice Scalia once described as the peak of his days on the bench an evening at the Opera Ball when he joined two Washington National Opera tenors at the piano for a medley of songs. He called it the famous Three Tenors performance. He was, indeed, a magnificent performer. It was my great good fortune to have known him as working colleague and treasured friend.
R.I.P. honored jurists.


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-19--The U.S. Constitution Appointments Clause

The President : “ Shall nominate , and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate , shall @ @ @ @ @ Ministers and Consuls , Judges of the supreme Court , and all other Officers of @ @ @ @ @ Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for , and which shall be established by Law @ @

The President: “Shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law.”


committeeconstructivetomorrowcfactorg--2020-09-17--Unmasking the Virginia Clean Economy Act

A recent Op-Ed by Del .
Richard ( “ Rip ” ) Sullivan lauds the Virginia Clean Economy Act ( VCEA ) which mandates requiring the construction of wind and solar electricity facilities in Virginia .
His editorial criticizes a recent decision by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ( FERC ) regarding the price which can be charged by renewable electricity suppliers in the interstate market .
In essence , FERC ’ s new rule states that when electricity generated by renewable providers is sold in interstate markets , the price must reflect all of the subsidies provided by Virginia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suppliers will not compete unfairly with electricity generated by existing sources .
And what a vast array of renewable electricity subsidies there are : production tax credits , investment credits , property tax exemptions , rebates , loan guarantees , residential tax credits , job creation credits – the list goes on .
FERC stated , that failure to consider the impact of these subsidies would result in obvious price distortion , and violate the FERC mandate to assure that prices are “ just and reasonable and not discriminatory or preferential ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ patron of VCEA , this will prevent solar and wind being the sole providers of electricity in Virginia .
Think California !
What is “ renewable ” electricity costs to consumers without these subsidies ?
Sullivan states that under the FERC Order , we “ will suddenly be forced to supply wind electricity at an artificially inflated price , twenty times higher than the maximum price ” allowed by FERC .
Twenty times higher !
Without all the subsidies , renewable generated electricity costs consumers twenty times more than electricity supplied by existing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
FERC just exposed exactly what VCEA will cost us in order to achieve the fantasy of all wind and solar electrical generation in Virginia by 2035 .

A recent Op-Ed by Del. Richard (“Rip”) Sullivan lauds the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) which mandates requiring the construction of wind and solar electricity facilities in Virginia.
His editorial criticizes a recent decision by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regarding the price which can be charged by renewable electricity suppliers in the interstate market.
He claims the FERC decision assaults “basic free market competition”.
In essence, FERC’s new rule states that when electricity generated by renewable providers is sold in interstate markets, the price must reflect all of the subsidies provided by Virginia to these suppliers, so that these suppliers will not compete unfairly with electricity generated by existing sources.
And what a vast array of renewable electricity subsidies there are: production tax credits, investment credits, property tax exemptions, rebates, loan guarantees, residential tax credits, job creation credits – the list goes on. FERC stated, that failure to consider the impact of these subsidies would result in obvious price distortion, and violate the FERC mandate to assure that prices are “just and reasonable and not discriminatory or preferential”.
Sullivan is upset, as the primary patron of VCEA, this will prevent solar and wind being the sole providers of electricity in Virginia. Think California!
What is “renewable” electricity costs to consumers without these subsidies?
Sullivan states that under the FERC Order, we “will suddenly be forced to supply wind electricity at an artificially inflated price, twenty times higher than the maximum price” allowed by FERC.
Twenty times higher! Without all the subsidies, renewable generated electricity costs consumers twenty times more than electricity supplied by existing sources.
No wonder he is upset. FERC just exposed exactly what VCEA will cost us in order to achieve the fantasy of all wind and solar electrical generation in Virginia by 2035.
This letter originally appeared in the Richmond Times-Dispatch