climatedepot--2020-07-20--California’s Carbon Market Fails in Practice and in Theory

Severin Borenstein explains at energypost.euCalifornia learns even flexible Emissions Markets won ’ t guarantee price stability .
Despite the author ’ s belief in reducing CO2 emissions , cap and trade is failing to deliver .
Excerpts in italics with my bolds .
After California ’ s May allowance auction settled at the minimum price and generated almost no revenues for the state , the long knives are again out in Sacramento for the state ’ s cap and trade program .
What ’ s the point of a carbon market , some are asking , if price and revenue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disappointing auction has caused proposals for stabilising the market price – such as those from the Independent Emissions Market Advisory Committee ( IEMAC ) in its 2019 report – to be taken more seriously , as they should be .
But the tweaks suggested by the IEMAC and others aren ’ t likely to live up to the expectations of policymakers .
That ’ s not because the proposed changes are unwise , but because the policymakers ’ expectations are unrealistic .
Many California regulators and legislators want cap and trade to guarantee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by 2030 , while at the same time maintaining a moderate allowance price , not at the floor , but not too high .
Only by a stroke of pure luck could the program deliver on both .
To see why , let ’ s revisit the design options for an emissions market .
Carbon prices can rise too high or fall too low Cap and trade “ classic ” simply sets a cap on emissions and lets the price do all the work to get us there , with no restrictions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ pollutant is high – which could be driven by a strong economy , cheap fossil fuels , and/or slow progress in low-emissions technologies – the price could spiral to astonishing levels .
Cap and trade classic generally would get you to the emissions quantity , but possibly at an unacceptable economic or political cost .
And if the demand for emitting is low – such as results from an economic downturn , expensive fossil fuels , and/or competitive low-carbon alternatives – it is quite possible to end up with a price of zero @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emissions at all .
The price in cap and trade classic is hard to predict , because the future of the economy , fossil fuels , and emissions reduction technologies are hard to predict .
Emissions taxes : a fixed disincentive has its limitations too Emissions tax “ classic ” does the opposite .
It sets a fixed price , which establishes a constant incentive to reduce pollution regardless of how much is being emitted .
But then polluters emit whatever quantity they choose as long as they are willing to pay the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is high , the outcome will be high levels of emissions .
In economic parlance , where cap and trade classic creates a vertical supply curve for emissions allowances ( at a fixed quantity ) and emissions tax classic creates a horizontal supply curve for allowances ( at a fixed price ) , the new and improved cap and trade creates an upward sloping supply curve for allowances , restricting the quantity somewhat when demand and price are low , which prevents the price from going even lower , and expanding the quantity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the price from going even higher .
What these modifications do is share the impact of unpredictable emissions demand between quantity adjustment and price adjustment , rather than putting the impact of demand uncertainty all on quantity ( emissions tax classic ) or all on price ( cap and trade classic ) .
What they don ’ t do is get us to the policymakers ’ nirvana of predictable emissions quantity and price .
Until someone figures out how to reliably predict both macroeconomic growth and technological progress that won ’ t be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not a flaw in emissions pricing .
It ’ s a reality of any type of emissions control policies .
Technology mandates – the alternatives to pricing – generally don ’ t ensure a total level of emissions ( usually just emissions intensity ) , and never ensure the cost of achieving a given level of emissions .
A market based on the non-delivery of a non-good , What could go wrong ?
Let us count the ways Context : As the image shows , alarmist/activists understand Climate Change ( man made assumed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three assertions being true .
The first one is the science bit , being the unproven claim that humans make the planet warmer by burning fossil fuels .
( See Global Warming Theory and the Tests It Fails ) The second one is the claim from billions of dollars invested into researching any and all negative effects from global warming , from Acne to Zika virus .
The third and also necessary leg is the assertion that governments can act to prevent future warming .
From time to time it is instructive to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first two , but have lost confidence in the policies proposed as remedies .
Jeffrey Ball writes at Science Direct , not questioning climate science or feared impacts , but distraught about the failed efforts to do something to reduce emissions .
His article is Hot Air Won ’ t Fly : The New Climate Consensus That Carbon Pricing Isn ’ t Cutting It Excerpts in italics with my bolds .
Jeffrey Ball , a writer whose work focuses on energy and the environment , is the scholar-in-residence at Stanford University ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a lecturer at Stanford Law School .
He also is a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution .
His writing has appeared in Foreign Affairs , Fortune , Mother Jones , The Atlantic , New Republic , The New York Times , and The Wall Street Journal , among other publications .
Ball , previously The Wall Street Journal ’ s environment editor , focuses his Stanford research on improving the effectiveness of clean-energy investment , particularly in China .
In the history of climate change , 2018 will go down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit home , truths inconvenient for partisans on all sides .
Those on the right , at least those who have been arguing that greenhouse-gas emissions aren ’ t a significant problem , wereforced to recognize that those emissions are causing real harm to real people right now.Those on the left , at least those who have put their faith in the promise of renewable energy to cool the planet , had to reckon with the reality that , even as those technologies boomed , carbon emissions continued to grow .
And those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calling for what seemed in theory a sensible climate policy—putting a price on carbon emissions—had to concede that theirsupposed solution isn ’ t helping much at all .
No single event can be attributed to climate change , but scientists cite a lengthening list of unfolding events , from wildfires in California to drought in Europe to rising waters along Bangladesh , as evidence of the effects of a warming world .
Even the administration of US President Donald Trump , which has rolled back myriad climate policies , noted in a November @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Climate Assessment , that the effects of climate change “ are already being felt in communities across the country ” —from intensifying flooding in the nation ’ s northeast region , to worsening drought in the southwestern part of the country , to rising temperatures and erosion that are damaging buildings in Alaska .
Renewable energy isn ’ t stopping that .
It represented 70 % of net new power-generating capacity installed globally in 2017 , a stunning share that reflects falling costs and rising penetration .
Yet for all that growth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ estimated 14 % of total global energy in 2017 , up about 1 percentage point from its share in 2000 , because fossil-fuel energy capacity also has been increasing .
Indeed , even as renewable-energy capacity hit an all-time high , energy-related carbon emissions did too .
They rose 1.6 % in 2017 , following three years in which they were flat , and they are expected to have risen further in 2018 .
Emissions are increasing even though more governments than ever before have imposed prices on carbon emissions , either levying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system of pollution permits so that those who emit greenhouse gases have a financial incentive to reduce them .
That is little wonder , given that less than 1 % of global carbon emissions are subject to a price that economists peg as high enough to meaningfully curb them .
This past June , in an essay in Foreign Affairs , “ Why Carbon Pricing Isn ’ t Working , ” I cataloged evidence that carbon pricing is failing to meaningfully reduce carbon emissions around the world—from Europe , where the policy took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leading policymakers have embraced it , to China , which is in the early stages of ramping up what will be by far the biggest carbon-pricing regime on the planet .
I argued that , though in theory carbon pricing makes sense , in practice it is failing , for two reasons : structurally , carbon pricing tends toconstrain emissions mostly in the electricity sector , leaving the transportation and building sectors largely unaffected ; and politically , even those governments that have imposed carbon prices have lacked the fortitude to set them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emissions .
As a result , I wrote , “ a policy prescription widely billed as a panacea is acting as a narcotic .
It ’ s giving politicians and the public the warm feeling that they ’ re fighting climate change even as the problem continues to grow.
” Not just ineffective , carbon pricing is proving counterproductive , because “ it is reducing the pressure to adopt other carbon-cutting measures , ones that would hit certain sectors harder and that would produce faster reductions.
” Among those other needed measures : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ except where it is burned with carbon-capture- and -sequestration technology , which minimizes its emissions ; maintaining , rather than closing , nuclear plants ; makingrenewable energy cheaper ; and mandating greater energy efficiency .
Would that the half year since that essay was published had proven its assessment too harsh .
Unfortunately , recent events and analyses have only bolstered it .
Since the summer , and in the lead-up to the latest global climate-policy conference , this month in Poland , studies exploring carbon pricing ’ s shortcomings have begun piling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new and sobering climate-literature genre .
Belief in carbon pricing was strong in 2015 , when policymakers from some 190 countries issued the Paris Agreement , calling for measures to keep the increase in the average global temperature “ well below ” 2°C above preindustrial levels and for “ pursuing efforts ” to keep the rise below 1.5°C.6 Unlike prior climate agreements , notably the Kyoto Protocol , which nearly two decades earlier had pressed for emission cuts only from developed countries , the Paris Agreement included specific emission-reduction pledges even by China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which now produce the bulk of global emissions .
But the pledges countries made in Paris werevoluntary rather than mandatory , and most were relatively weak .
Even if countries made good on them , it was clear , the world would not cut emissions anywhere near enough to avoid crashing through the 2°C threshold .
Coming out of Paris , carbon pricing was a presumption .
In 2017 , a group of leading economists backed by the World Bank and called the High-Level Commission on Carbon Prices announced that meeting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of US $ 40 to $ 80 per metric ton of carbon dioxide by 2020 and of $ 50 to $ 100 per ton by 2030 .
But in May the World Bank reported that , though the percentage of global greenhouse-gas emissions subject to carbon prices had risen to 20 % , only 3 % of those emissions were priced at or above the important $ 40 level .
In other words , fewer than 1 % of all global greenhouse-gas emissions are priced at a level likely to constrain them .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are being toughened , but neither is happening quickly enough to make much environmental difference .
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ( OECD ) , parsing the numbers somewhat differently than does the World Bank , calculates that 76.5 % all energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in OECD and Group of 20 ( G20 ) countries either aren ’ t priced at all or are priced below 30 euros per metric ton of carbon dioxide , a level the OECD calls “ a low-end estimate of the damage that carbon emissions currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” in OECD parlance , has narrowed by just 1 percentage point in each of the past three years—hardly a relevant climate win .
It is against this backdrop that critiques of carbon pricing have begun to accumulate .
One of the more notable was published in August by the International Monetary Fund ( IMF ) , whose head , Christine Lagarde , has been an enthusiastic supporter of carbon pricing .
She called in 2017 for this response to carbon dioxide : “ Price it right , tax it smart , do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s new working paper makes clear , most carbon prices thus far imposed haven ’ t been right , relying on carbon taxes hasn ’ t been terribly smart , and , if “ it ” means a serious response to climate change , the world isn ’ t doing it now .
The authors of the IMF study used a model to project how carbon prices at two levels by 2030— $ 35 per metric ton of carbon dioxide and $ 70 per ton—would affect emissions in the G20 economies .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anywhere near even the lower of those numbers . )
The IMF model clarifies why the world ’ s largest economies find it so economically and politically difficult to impose a robust price on carbon , just how inadequate were the pledges most countries made in Paris , and how wrenching it will likely be even for countries that made relatively significant Paris pledges to follow through on those promises .
Carbon pricing , as I noted in Foreign Affairs in June , “ works well for industries that use a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to them to reduce that energy use , and that can ’ t easily relocate to places where energy is cheaper.
” That is why it tends to bite first in the electricity sector .
The IMF model underscores this , concluding that the major determinant of how significantly a givencarbon price will curb emissions in a given country is the extent to which that country ’ s electricity sector relies on coal .
A $ 70 carbon tax , the IMF model projects , would cut emissions by significantly more than 30 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and South Africa ; by some 15 % –25 % in such countries as the United States , Canada , and the United Kingdom ; and by less than 15 % in coal-light France and Saudi Arabia.9 ( That helps explain why , among all these countries , only France has imposed a carbon price above $ 40 per ton .
Andeven France has difficulty raising the effective price on carbon , as the recent Yellow Vest protests , which led France to suspend a proposed fuel-tax increase , show . )
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helps explain its political difficulties .
The IMF ’ s modeled carbon tax is particularly regressive—meaning its cost falls particularly heavily on the poorest—in China and the United States , the world ’ s two top carbon emitters .
( Electricity access in these two coal-heavy nations is broad , meaning the poor there tend to spend a greater portion of their income on carbon-intense power than do the rich . )
Although both countries are experimenting with carbon pricing , it is little surprise that the prices in both remain low .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ than in other parts of the United States that have implemented them , but California gets only a small amount of its electricity from coal—and most of that is imported from other states—which bolsters the point .
The IMF analysis also helps clarify why China , the world ’ s top coal burner , proffered a relatively weak Paris pledge .
Some governments are trying to counteract the regressive nature of carbon pricing by layering on structures to return all or some of the resulting revenue to consumers—a worthwhile idea .
But even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jurisdictions .
Even some countries whose Paris pledges were more robust are likely to have difficulty following through on them .
Those pledges “ might imply increases in energy prices ( and burdens on vulnerable groups ) that push the bounds of political acceptability , ” the IMF paper notes .
A meaningful reduction in carbon emissions , the IMF concludes , would require backstopping countries ’ Paris pledges in two ways : by imposing carbon-price floors—levels below which countries decree that their carbon prices will not fall—and by imposing policies other than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Inoffensive carbon pricing alone won ’ t cut it .
Even extraordinarily high carbon prices are failing in important ways to spur significant carbon cuts .
A piece published in Energy Policy in late June by Endre Tvinnereim and Michael Mehling explores the uninspiring example of Sweden .
The small Scandinavian country has , according to the World Bank , the highest carbon price in the world , at $ 126 per ton , based on current currency-exchange rates.4 Yet in the quarter century between 1990 , when Sweden introduced its carbon tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Swedish road transportation fell only 4 % .
Meanwhile , sales in Sweden of new internal-combustion vehicles continue to rise , imposing what the authors call “ carbon lock-in ” from vehicles likely to remain on the road a decade or more.What ’ s needed , they argue , are bans on the sale of new internal-combustion cars , bans of the sort that have been proposed in such countries as China , India , France , the United Kingdom , and Norway .
Pricing carbon “ is useful , ” they write @ @ @ @ @ @ @ achieve deep decarbonization.
” The authors are right that policies beyond carbon pricing are needed .
But clarity about the goal of such policies is key .
Some recent critiques of carbon pricing , at least implicitly , construe success in fighting climate change as requiring the near-total replacement of fossil fuels with renewable energy .
Plenty of evidence , however , suggests that structuring the climate fight primarily as a pursuit of renewables is neither realistic nor particularly smart .
The goal in fighting climate change is not to end the use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fuel the world while cutting carbon emissions essentially to zero .
That will require dramatically lowering the cost and thus boosting the penetration of renewable and other non-fossil energy sources .
It also will mean ensuring that the large quantities offossil fuels that are all but certain to continue to be burned for decades to come are burned using technologies that slash the amount of carbon dioxide their combustion coughs into the atmosphere .
The policies necessary to achieve these twin ends will be complex .
A meaningful carbon price would help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world there is little evidence policymakers have the stomach to impose one .
Climate change is real .
Fighting it demands—from everyone involved—more than rhetoric .
That this message is getting across is a good sign .
The graph illustrates the problem very clearly .
Since 1994 there have been 24 Conferences of the Parties ( COP ) , along with numerous other meetings .
These UNFCCC discussions have utterly failed to reduce CO2 emissions .
Yet from 2020 , emissions have to drop dramatically , if we are to stand a chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to IPCC SR15 this will require an annual average investment of around US $ 2.4 trillion ( at 2010 prices ) between 2016 and 2035 , representing approximately 2.5 % of global gross domestic product ( GDP ) .
The cost of inaction and delay , however , will be many times greater .
( sic ) .
Note : This is referring to increasing investments in renewable energy from current US $ 335B per year to $ 2.4T .
Present global spending on Climate Crisis Inc. is estimated at nearly US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So this would double the money spent on this hypothetical problem .
After reading Ball ’ s assessment it is obvious that carbon pricing will only reduce emissions by crashing national economies .
The fear of CO2 leads directly to discussion of stopping modern societies in their tracks .
Talking about policies that “ bite ” this or that sector equates to intentionally dictating economic decline , industry by industry .
And Ball suggests that ever more intrusive bans and regulations must be added on top of higher carbon prices in order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of life .
This analysis has been preceded by numerous doomsday deadlines over the decades which we have passed and not suffered in the least .
Can we finally dismiss the illusion that we humans control the temperature of the planet ?
Can we stop the crazy schemes to cut our CO2 emissions , and appreciate instead the greening of the biosphere ?
Rational public policymakers can not presume the climate will be unchanging in the future .
Our experience teaches that there will be future periods both warmer and cooler than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ periods are the greater threat to human health and prosperity .
Instead of wasting time and resources trying to control the future weather , we should be preparing to adapt to whatever nature brings .
The priorities should be to ensure affordable and reliable energy and robust infrastructure .


climatedepot--2020-07-20--Analysis: Biden’s Climate Plan Is ‘Solyndra on Steroids’ – NYT: ‘Biden’s plan connects tackling clim

Analysis: Biden’s Climate Plan Is ‘Solyndra on Steroids’ – NYT: ‘Biden’s plan connects tackling climate change…while also addressing racism’

I couldn ’ t help but laugh when I read the sub-headline of this New York Times report on Joe Biden ’ s recent speech laying out his new , improved environmental policy proposals .
It reads , “ Joe Biden ’ s plan connects tackling climate change with the economic recovery from the coronavirus crisis , while also addressing racism.
” Oh , is that all ?
Forgive me for assuming his advisors just wanted to toss a bunch of hot topics into a single speech to limit his exposure to the voting public .
Biden ’ s plan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ achieving an emissions-free power sector by 2035 and upgrading four million buildings over four years to meet the highest standards for energy efficiency… .
[ H ] e promised that “ the U.S. auto industry and its deep bench of suppliers will step up , expanding capacity so that the United States , not China , leads the world in clean vehicle production.
” … .
He also pressed the need to link environmental advocacy to racial justice , describing pollution and other toxic harms that disproportionately affect communities of color .
One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an emissions-free power sector by 2035 ” to recognize this as an unserious plan .
As the Times acknowledges , its subtext is shoring up the support of the various Democratic factions who ’ ve long been skeptical of Biden .
The “ climate justice ” crowd has struggled to figure out what his environmental policies actually are ( they ’ re not alone ) , and doubt his commitment to their cause .
The Race uber alles coterie is inclined to hold his role in crafting the ’ 94 crime bill against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t really trust anyone to deliver but Bernie .
And the promise of auto-industry jobs and his shot at China are an attempt at outreach to the blue-collar voters who pulled the lever for Trump in 2016 .
This is not to say that we shouldn ’ t be concerned about this plan should Biden win in November .
House minority whip Steve Scalise referred to it as “ Solyndra on steroids , ” and that about sums it up .
Biden didn ’ t assign a dollar amount to his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he plans to spend significantly more than the $ 1.7 trillion his campaign had initially proposed .
It would be hard for a President Biden to renege on a commitment to that kind of spending without drawing a primary challenge from , say , Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in 2024 , when she will have just turned 35 .
How would a Biden administration pay for this you might ask ?
Easy : The odd conflation of corporations and “ the wealthiest Americans ” aside , the U.S. only just cut the corporate tax rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2017 , and it isn ’ t as if we had trillions of dollars in the budget to spend on electric cars before then .
Joe Biden wants voters to think of him as reasonable and moderate , but proposals like this , ordered towards appeasing the most extreme elements in his party , are a window into how he would actually govern : disastrously .
Read more at The Pipeline

Thank you for being patient. We are doing some work on the site and will be back shortly.


climatedepot--2020-07-20--NOAA Falsely Claims ‘Extraordinary’ Sea-Level Rise, Data Says Otherwise

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration , which relies on perpetuation of the Climate Delusion to maintain high funding , is falsely claiming there has been an “ extraordinary ” sea-level rise since 2000 .
Fox News and other media outlets are devoting substantial attention to the assertion by NOAA bureaucrats .
However , there is simply nothing extraordinary about the recent sea-level rise .
According to Fox News , NOAA claims “ Communities in coastal areas of the U.S. saw record-setting high-tide flooding last year , part of a trend of rising seas … [ and an ] ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2000.
” “ Damaging floods that decades ago happened only during a storm now happen more regularly , even without severe weather , ” Nicole LeBoeuf , acting assistant administrator for NOAA ’ s National Ocean Service , told reporters in a conference call .
Even if high-tide flooding has increased in recent years , natural factors are the primary cause .
As detailed in Climate at a Glance : Sea Level Rise : Data shows global sea level has been rising at a relatively steady pace of approximately one foot per century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was long before coal power plants and SUVs .
Moreover , the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC ) confirms here has been no significant recent acceleration .
Global sea level has risen approximately 400 feet since the beginning of the end of the most recent ice age—approximately 20,000 years ago .
The rate of sea-level rise has risen and fallen at various times since then , slowing and increasing on the order of tens , hundreds , and thousands of years over the past 20,000 years .
All of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human activities .
Indeed , as NASA reports , sea level always rises between ice ages as ice sheets retreat .
During the last interglacial period between ice ages , seas were four to six meters higher than we are experiencing today .
The best evidence is , regardless of what humans do , sea level will continue modestly yet relentlessly rising , sometimes slower than others , until the next ice age begins .
Also , climate alarmists try to hide the fact that NASA records indicate the current rate of sea-level @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for most of the present interglacial period .
Indeed , there have been periods during this interglacial when seas rose by as much as 10 to 15 meters in less than 500 years .
Also , as detailed in a report by the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change ( NIPCC ) , some cities , like Ceuta , Spain , have experienced almost no sea-level rise over the past century .
Other cities , such as Sitka , Alaska have actually experienced falling sea levels .
Still , other cities , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large , rapid increase in sea levels .
Humans may be contributing to “ high-tide ” flooding on sunny days , but the activities in question are not primarily the emission of greenhouse gases .
Instead , those activities include the construction of barriers and impervious surfaces leading to increased runoff , the channelization of rivers , the conversion of coastal wetlands to densely populated metropolitan areas , filling in shallow water bays , replenishing eroded beaches , and the draining of coastal aquifers for human consumption .
These land-use changes have undoubtedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ populations more vulnerable to rising seas and other cities and populations less vulnerable .
For instance , the Chesapeake Bay region along the East Coast is one of the regions NOAA discusses as experiencing increased high-tide flooding in recent years .
However , a NIPCC climate report shows “ water intrusion problems in the Chesapeake Bay region are due not to sea-level rise , but primarily to land subsidence due to groundwater depletion and glacial isostatic adjustment.
” In short , the rate of sea-level rise has increased little , if at all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flooding has increased in some areas , causes other than climate change are the primary source of the flooding .


climatedepot--2020-07-20--How Have Our Scientific Experts Gotten So Much Wrong? – ‘Most important lesson of the coronavirus cr

How Have Our Scientific Experts Gotten So Much Wrong? – ‘Most important lesson of the coronavirus crisis is that being blinded by science is not a good thing’

Perhaps the most important lesson of the coronavirus crisis is that being blinded by science is not a good thing .
Masks don ’ t make a difference .
Remember that ?
It was about two months ago .
The consensus of scientific experts who must be obeyed unless one is a Trump-loving troglodyte assured us that there was no need to don a silly mask .
Today , masks are the Holy Grail of stopping the virus .
How did that happen ?
What do we know in July that we didn ’ t know in May ?
Why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supposed value of masks while we didn ’ t ?
I ’ ll give you another one .
On February 29 , Dr. Anthony Fauci , the Lord High Guru Of All Science , went on the “ Today Show ” and told Americans the virus was “ low risk ” and that we should not modify our behavior .
Two weeks later we shut down the country and invited the most devastating economic collapse in generations .
Again , how did that happen ?
But of all the blunders by our elite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perhaps the most significant is one that President Trump pointed out in March only to be jeered and mocked .
On March 4 , the president told Sean Hannity that he had a hunch that the World Health Organization ’ s assertion that 3.4 percent of people who contracted the Chinese Virus would die was wrong .
He said he believed the actual number was closer to .5 percent .
“ Trump ’ s Gut Collides With Science , ” mocked NPR .
Even I threw shade at POTUS , not because I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the term “ hunch.
” But guess what , folks ?
We now know that the Center for Disease Control and Prevention ’ s “ best estimate ” for the mortality rate of the virus is .4 percent .
Huh .
Months after the mockery of him , it turns out Trump was right .
It also turns out , and I know this is impossible so I can ’ t explain it , the scientific experts who must be obeyed were , how should I put this…um , ( leans into microphone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot of mistakes made by our betters with fancy letters after their name , but perhaps none so consequential as the wildly inflated mortality rate back in February and March .
To put it in perspective , at a 3.4 percent death rate if 50 million Americans contracted Covid , 1.7 million would die .
At the mortality rate of .4 percent that number shrinks to 200,000 .
All loss of life is tragic , but scientists were having us destroy the economy and people ’ s lives based on a woefully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this crisis our medical experts have seemed to have approximately the accuracy of a Magic 8 Ball displaying “ signs point to yes.
” They have gotten so much so wrong so often that we must reevaluate how we use the guidance they give .
Instead of simply accepting that the experts ’ models and predictions are a priori facts graven in stone on Mt .
Sinai ’ s rock by the hand of God , we should be , well , a little more skeptical .
Let me be clear , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the expertise of scientists .
But I am suggesting that we should look at it as one part of a complicated situation rather than allowing ourselves to be led off of a cliff we can see with our own eyes based solely on their findings .
Perhaps the most important lesson of the coronavirus crisis is that being blinded by science is not a good thing .
Science is a tool , not an oracle .
It exists in a perpetual loop of proving itself wrong .
In fact , that is pretty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How Have Our Scientific Experts Gotten So Much Wrong ?
appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .


climatedepot--2020-07-20--Watch: Morano on Fox & Friends on Biden’s Green New Deal 2.0 – Biden ceding climate policy to AOC, S

Watch: Morano on Fox & Friends on Biden’s Green New Deal 2.0 – Biden ceding climate policy to AOC, Sanders wing of party

Jedediah Bila : Thanks , Jason .
Joe Biden revealing part of his build back better economic plan this week focusing on clean energy with a $ 2 trillion price tag , but is Biden ’ s so-called clean energy revolution just the green New Deal with a different name ?
Here to react is executive editor of climate depot.com and author of the politically incorrect guide to climate change , mark welcome to the show as always so is this the green New Deal revisited , what ’ s the deal here ?
Marc Morano : Biden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in former Obama EPA officials , brought on AOC and Bernie right behind and they have literally ghostwritten this plan .
It is his version of the Green New Deal which on paper is only half as expensive as AOC ’ s original green New Deal but it has all the aspirations of it .
It ’ s a slightly slower start than AOC ’ s vision but once it commits us Biden ’ s overriding principle is he wants to make this so no future president , what Trump has done to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so once this begins they could put my price tag they want on it because it ’ s going to be locked in and Biden is essentially doing the exact same thing that AOC , that Bernie Sanders and all of the other architects of the Green New Deal did .
( > > Biden ’ s Climate advisory council recruited Tom Steyer brought in former Obama EPA officials , brought on AOC and Bernie right behind and they have literally ghostwritten this plan .
It is his version of the Green New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as expensive as AOC ’ s original green New Deal but it has all the aspirations of it .
It ’ s a slightly slower start than AOC ’ s vision but once it commits us Biden ’ s overriding principle is he wants to make this so no future president , what Trump has done to President Obama , could ever undo this so once this begins they could put my price tag they want on it because it ’ s going to be locked in and Biden is essentially doing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bernie Sanders and all of the other architects of the Green New Deal did .
( See : Biden : “ We ’ re going to lock in progress that no future president can roll back or undercut to take us backward again.
” Jedediah : And Marc , we have an interesting flashback from July 8 of Bernie Sanders .
Check out what he had to say on policy proposals .
[ Video clip of Bernie Sanders : “ The most knowledgeable people in the country coming together to deal with education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they came up with , if implemented , will make Biden the most Progressive president since FDR.
” ] Jedediah : Yeah , so this is after they put out their unity plan that seems to me an admission that the hard left of that party is now heavily involved in kind of organizing what Joe Biden releases .
Now , is this a surprise to you though ?
Doesn ’ t he have to cater to that hard left to get them excited to get out and vote for them ?
Marc @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cater .
This , you know , AOC ’ s Chief of Staff , other architects of the Green New Deal have admitted it ’ s nothing more than a redistribution of wealth and a change everything in America plan — so they are just using the climate issue to do that and Biden , as he ’ s running , has to unify the base , so he ’ s brought in , — matter of fact he ’ s basing his climate plan on Wash. state Governor > > Biden absolutely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you know , AOC ’ s Chief of Staff , other architects of the Green New Deal have admitted it ’ s nothing more than a redistribution of wealth and a change everything in America plan — so they are just using the climate issue to do that and Biden , as he ’ s running , has to unify the base , so he ’ s brought in , — matter of fact he ’ s basing his climate plan on Wash. state Governor Inslee — who barely showed up in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — so you ’ ve got Inslee , AOC , Carol Browner from Obama ’ s EPA — they are all basically taking over Biden ’ s climate and energy plan and this is from the hard left of the Democrats , the same people if you remember who wanted to ban car ownership in favor of a fleet of rental electric cars and one of the candidates said who wants to stop in the single-family homes — Elizabeth Warren — wanted to unless they ’ re built sustainably .
All of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ version of the Green New Deal .
Maybe just slightly less expensive at the start and slightly less noticeable .
He ’ s trying to mask it a little bit from as Slate magazine was saying it ’ s the green New Deal without the crazy or wackiness or leftist overreach is what he said at least it ’ s being presented as more mainstream .
It ’ s the same plan .
Jedediah : You know , Marc , we don ’ t have much time but very quickly will this marketing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I don ’ t know .
Climate is not a huge issue like they thought it was going to be in the 2020 election .
One of the things that climate activists are so jealous of is they saw how the lockdowns from COVID happened and everyone from U.N. Officials , to professors to teen activists — they ’ re all saying if we can shutdown the world for a virus we can do it for a climate emergency .
So they ’ re trying to use the Green New Deal to shut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we did with the lockdowns .
That ’ s what their dream is , to be able to regulate every aspect of our economy .
Jedediah : Yeah , well thank , Marc we appreciate your input and it remains to be seen will the Biden campaign rebrand any other old hard-left policies coming our way in the future thanks so much .


climatedepot--2020-07-21--Greta Thunberg Awarded 1 Million Euros as the Winner of Prize for Humanity for being ‘one of the mos

Greta Thunberg Awarded 1 Million Euros as the Winner of Prize for Humanity for being ‘one of the most remarkable figures of our days’

Greta Thunberg is the Winner of the First Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity The first edition of the Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity has been awarded to Greta Thunberg .
The young Swedish environmental activist was selected among 136 nominees ( corresponding to 79 organizations and 57 personalities ) from 46 different countries .
Thunberg ’ s foundation will donate the award money of 1 Million Euros to charitable projects combatting the climate and ecological crisis and to support people facing the worst impacts , particularly in the Global South .
Starting with giving €100.000 to the SOS Amazonia campaign , led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 in the Amazon , and €100.000 to the Stop Ecocide Foundation to support their work to make ecocide an international crime .
Jorge Sampaio , Chair of the Grand Jury of the Prize , has emphasized the broad consensus of this choice and pointed out “ the way Greta Thunberg has been able to mobilize younger generations for the cause of climate change and her tenacious struggle to alter a status quo that persists , makes her one of the most remarkable figures of our days ” .
Jorge Sampaio has also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pedagogical role and her leadership in the fight against climate change , as a condition for sustainable development , towards which the attribution of this Prize aims to contribute .
The Grand Jury , composed of internationally renowned personalities from the fields of science , technology , politics and culture , has highlighted Thunberg ’ s charismatic and inspiring personality , but also the force of her singular and distressing message capable of arousing disparate feelings , and her capacity to make a difference in the fight against climate change .
The President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mota , emphasized that “ By awarding this Prize , the Foundation highlights its commitment to urgent climate action , fostering communities that are more resilient and better prepared for future global changes , while also protecting , in particular , the most vulnerable ” .
Greta Thunberg said : “ I ’ m extremely honored to receive the Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity .
We ’ re in a climate emergency , and my foundation will as quickly as possible donate all the prize money of 1 million Euros to support organizations and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world , defending nature and supporting people already facing the worst impacts of the climate and ecological crisis — particularly those living in the Global South .
Starting with giving €100.000 to the SOS Amazonia campaign , led by Fridays For Future Brazil to tackle Covid-19 in the Amazon , and €100.000 to the Stop Ecocide Foundation to support their work to make ecocide an international crime.
” About the Prize and the Jury The Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity , awarded annually , in the amount of 1 million euros , aims to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organisations from all over the world whose contributions to mitigation and adaptation to climate change stand out for its novelty , innovation and impact .
The Grand Jury chaired by Jorge Sampaio , President of the Portuguese Republic from 1996 to 2006 , is composed by personalities like Hans Joachim Schellnhuber ( Founder and Director Emeritus of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research ) , Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim ( President of Indigenous Women and Peoples Association of Chad ) , Johan Rockström ( Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , Katherine Richardson ( Coordinator of the Centre of Sustainability Science at the University of Copenhagen ) , Miguel Arias Cañete ( former European Energy and Climate Action Commissioner ) , Miguel Bastos Araújo ( Geographer , Pessoa Award 2018 ) , Runa Khan ( Founder and Executive Director of the Friendship NGO and Country Chair of Global Dignity Bangladesh ) and Sunita Narain ( Writer and environmental activist , Director of the Centre for Science and Environment , New Delhi ) .
A Committee of Specialists , presided by Miguel Bastos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first stage , 136 nominations and presented a shortlist of 10 nominees , for the final assessment of the Grand Jury .
This Committee was composed of figures such as Arlindo Oliveira ( Full Professor at the Department of Information Technology , Instituto Superior Técnico , Lisbon ) , Carsten Rahbek ( Director of the Centre for Macroecology , Evolution and Climate , University of Copenhagen ) , Rik Leemans ( Director of the Environmental Systems Analysis Group , Wageningen University ) and Viriato Soromenho Marques ( Professor of Political Philosophy Teacher at @ @ @ @ @ @


climatedepot--2020-07-22--Canceled: America’s energy dominance – ‘Cancel culture coming’ for American energy

Steve Milloy : `` If Biden wins in November , immediately following his inauguration in January , the Browner and Ocasio-Cortez agenda will emerge in open control of the Biden energy policies .
U.S. energy dominance ?
Sorry : canceled . ''
`` Is cancel culture coming for America ’ s newfound energy dominance ?
Recently , Virginia and North Carolina utilities threw in the towel on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline ... On Monday , a U.S. district court in Washington ordered the Dakota Access Pipeline , running from North Dakota to Illinois , to halt operations pending a new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Supreme Court upheld the federal court ’ s stop-work order on the Keystone XL pipeline , which would bring oil sands from Canada to the Gulf Coast for refining .
All three pipelines have been vigorously opposed by radical environmental groups , often hiding behind Native American tribes . ''
Three major oil and gas pipelines have been scuttled or delayed this month .
Is cancel culture coming for America ’ s newfound energy dominance ?
Recently , Virginia and North Carolina utilities threw in the towel on the Atlantic Coast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natural gas from West Virginia to the two states for domestic use and export .
Although the developers had won a 7-2 Supreme Court ruling in May , the mounting and seemingly never-ending legal and regulatory processes and costs , coupled with the prospect of an anti-fracking and anti-economic growth Biden administration , were just too discouraging .
On Monday , a U.S. district court in Washington ordered the Dakota Access Pipeline , running from North Dakota to Illinois , to halt operations pending a new environmental review .
On the same day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court ’ s stop-work order on the Keystone XL pipeline , which would bring oil sands from Canada to the Gulf Coast for refining .
All three pipelines have been vigorously opposed by radical environmental groups , often hiding behind Native American tribes .
Despite years of detailed and thorough regulatory review by state and federal agencies , the greens and their tribal allies have always been able to find a court willing to frivolously rule that some essential “ i ” has not been dotted or some vital “ t ” has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as though we don ’ t already have plenty of safe experience with pipelines .
In fact , the United States has about 1.6 million miles of pipelines , including 500,000 miles that carry crude oil and large-volume natural gas .
Pipelines work and are safe for the environment , especially with modern leak detection and repair technologies .
Not to mention the fact that pipelines are obviously safer than transporting oil via less efficient and more expensive railroad tankers .
The saving grace is that there are railroads , other pipelines in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to transport oil and gas from wells in West Virginia and North Dakota and oil sand mines in Canada — for now , that is .
But storm clouds are on the horizon in the form of a Joe Biden administration .
Although the Biden campaign is desperately trying to keep a lid on what its energy polices would be , the end of American energy dominance is what ’ s coming .
In May , a Democratic National Committee panel on climate and the environment , headed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the key to our energy dominance .
But as that position would be a sure loser , Democratic elders stepped in to squash any talk of a fracking ban .
More recently , the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force issued a corrective climate plan that omitted mention of a fracking ban or the Green New Deal .
Although Ocasio-Cortez was on the task force , and despite her strong advocacy for banning fracking and for the Green New Deal , those views were totally silenced .
But you can bet that they are still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ocasio-Cortez , and they are what will be implemented if he ’ s the next president .
The Biden campaign recently announced yet another panel of climate advisors — one that includes Carol Browner , the former Clinton EPA chief and the Obama administration czar for the environment and energy .
Browner was the mastermind behind obtaining the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA , which allowed EPA to regulate greenhouse gases despite lacking any sort of authorization by Congress .
Browner also masterminded the Obama administration ’ s infamous war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the market value of the coal industry , killed 50,000 high-paying coal industry jobs , and sent many coal communities into desperate financial and social circumstances .
With the coal industry essentially finished off , it will now be fracking ’ s turn under a Biden administration .
In 2016 , Hillary Clinton made the mistake of talking about putting coal miners out of work .
That bit of honesty from Clinton clearly backfired in battleground states like Pennsylvania .
The Biden campaign will not be making the same mistake .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sealed the loose lips of socialist radicals like Ocasio-Cortez .
Browner , a former commissioner for Socialist International , is smart enough on her own to stay mum .
She will just point to the long-term and seemingly benign goal of making the U.S. carbon-neutral by 2050 .
If Biden wins in November , immediately following his inauguration in January , the Browner and Ocasio-Cortez agenda will emerge in open control of the Biden energy policies .
U.S. energy dominance ?
Sorry : canceled .
Steve Milloy publishes JunkScience.com , served on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ author of Scare Pollution : Why and How to Fix the EPA ( 2016 , Bench Press ) .


climatedepot--2020-07-22--How climate change alarmists are actually endangering the planet

“ You ’ ll die of old age , I ’ ll die of climate change , ” reads a @ @ @ @ @ in climate rallies across the world .
The media , activists and even politicians are @ @ @ @ @ , stoking the fears of millions .
Books on the impending implosion of civilization due @ @ @ @ @ in bookstores across the world .
Media outlets have changed the name of climate change @ @ @ @ @ climate emergency ” or even “ climate breakdown.
” The cover of Time magazine tells @ @ @ @ @ .
Be very worried .
”


climatedepot--2020-07-22--The biofuel boom was doomed from the start

That ’ s the verdict of OilPrice.com .
Climate catastrophists seem more interested in other supposed panaceas these days .
– – – Why haven ’ t biofuels taken off ?
For years they have been touted as the fuel of the future , with high-profile commercial aircraft making headlines for pioneering all-biofuel international flights and promising a greener future for air travel .
The first transatlantic flight powered solely by biofuel , a Gulfstream G450 owned by Honeywell International Inc. , took place nearly a decade ago , in 2011 , and was lauded as a harbinger of green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time , Honeywell Vice President Jim Rekoske told the world , “ We ’ re ready to go to commercial scale and commercial use.
” But now , nine years later , the biofuel revolution that we were promised , both in the air and on our highways , is nowhere to be seen .
As of 2020 , biofuels account for a piddling amount of the global jet fuel mix , clocking in at less than .1 percent in 2018 according to data from the International Energy Agency .
Even though biofuel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is comically slow .
“ In the U.S. , the federal Energy Information Administration projects that the consumption of all biofuels will rise from 7.3 percent of total fuel consumption in 2019 to just 9 percent in 2040 , ” reports Bloomberg Green , and that ’ s only if oil prices fail to recover .
“ Even if petroleum prices skyrocket , biofuel consumption is predicted to increase to just 13.5 % by 2050.
” Despite all of their promise and the flood of headlines declaring that biofuels were going to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around going forward , global investors just haven ’ t gotten behind biofuels .
“ Global investment in biofuel production capacity , meanwhile , plunged from $ 22.9 billion in 2007 to $ 500 million in 2019 , ” Bloomberg Green reports using data from BloombergNEF .
“ That has significant implications for decarbonizing transportation , which is key to keeping global average temperature rise to 1.5C to avoid catastrophic climate impacts .
”


climatedepot--2020-07-22--She’s Back! Greta Thunberg Demands Response To Climate ‘Crisis‘ NOW

Teenage climate worrier Greta Thunberg issued a string of fresh demands Thursday for world leaders to take emergency action on climate change , lamenting some had “ given up ” on the possibility of preparing a decent future for coming generations .
Key to her list of executive actions was an immediate end to all investments in fossil fuel in parallel with a shutting down of fossil fuel subsidies as well as making “ ecocide an international crime at the International Criminal Court.
” In an interview with Reuters , the 17-year-old said governments must accept the need to transform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ step in avoiding “ a climate catastrophe.
” “ We need to see it as , above all , an existential crisis .
And as long as it ’ s not being treated as a crisis , we can have as many of these climate change negotiations and talks , conferences as possible .
It won ’ t change a thing , ” Thunberg said , speaking via video from her home in Stockholm .
Her call to action marks a return to the global stage after she complained too many people were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ achievements rather than working to the common environmental goals she keeps setting : “ Above all , we are demanding that we need to treat this crisis as a crisis , because if we don ’ t do that , then we won ’ t be able to do anything , ” Thunberg said .
Thunberg joined several thousand people , including climate scientists , economists , actors , and activists in signing an open letter urging European leaders to start treating climate change like an “ emergency , ” Reuters reports .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a European Council summit where countries in the 27-member E.U .
will try to reach a deal on the bloc ’ s next budget and outline a path to economic recovery after the coronavirus pandemic .
Demands in the letter included an immediate halt to all investments in fossil fuel exploration and extraction , in parallel with a rapid ending of fossil fuel subsidies .
It also called for binding annual “ carbon budgets ” to limit how much greenhouse gas countries can emit to maximize the chances of capping the rise in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goal enshrined in the 2015 Paris climate accord .
“ We understand and know very well that the world is complicated and that what we are asking for may not be easy .
The changes necessary to safeguard humanity may seem very unrealistic , ” the letter said .
“ But it is much more unrealistic to believe that our society would be able to survive the global heating we ’ re heading for , as well as other disastrous ecological consequences of today ’ s business as usual .
”


climatedepot--2020-07-22--New Paper Shows Hidden Cost Of Net-Zero Decarbonization

The UK faces a £200 billion bill to rewire the country if the government follows through on plans to electrify the country ’ s homes and transport systems .
That ’ s because the installation of electric car chargers and heat pumps will push up demand for power beyond the capacity of the existing wiring .
The findings are set out in a new report from the Global Warming Policy Foundation , which is published today .
According to author Mike Travers , this will mean that most streets in the UK will need to be dug up ( with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , new home car chargers and heat pumps are using up all the spare capacity .
But we will soon reach the point where the network will not be able to handle the extra demand .
So in towns and cities , the underground cables which carry the power will be inadequate .
That means that we are going to have to dig up almost every urban street and many rural ones too .
The whole distribution grid is going to need to be replaced.
” And the cables that carry power into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up too .
“ The power cables taking electricity into your home probably run underneath your front drive .
So if you want a car charger and a heat pump you are going to have to pay to dig it up .
If you have an expensive monoblock drive , that will not be cheap .
Distribution boards , main fuses , and smart meters in homes are going to have to be upgraded too.
” Travers has estimated the cost of all this work at around £200 billion , even before considering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Many homeowners will be paying thousands ” , he says .
Plans to decarbonize the economy will probably require homeowners to install : The extra demand for electricity will overwhelm most domestic fuses , thus requiring homeowners to install new ones , as well as circuit-breakers and new distribution boards .
Most will also have to rewire between their main fuse and the distribution network .
In urban areas , where most electrical cabling is underground , this will involve paying for a trench to be dug between the home and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ addition , increased demand along a street will mean that the distribution network will need to be upgraded too .
This will involve installing larger cables and replacing distribution transformers with larger ones .
Most urban streets will need to be dug up .
In rural areas , where electricity is normally carried on overhead cables , it may be possible to just replace the wires , but it is more likely that cabling will have to be buried instead .
The cost to the country of rewiring alone will probably exceed £200 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This figure excludes the cost of new equipment , such as EV chargers , heat pumps , and electric showers .
Mike Travers , CEng , MIMechE , FIET is an electrical engineer , whose career spanned periods in the Royal Engineers , in the hydroelectric sector , and industry .
His paper is entitled The Hidden Cost of Net Zero : Rewiring the UK and can be downloaded here ( pdf )


climatedepot--2020-07-22--‘Eco-Warriors’ Meghan and Harry’s Carbon Footprint Could Be 26 Times That Of The Average Brit

The carbon footprint of “ eco-warriors ” Prince Harry and Meghan could be 26 times higher than the average Brit .
The ex-royals were seen on Friday in Beverly Hills in a Cadillac Escalade , said to be among the most polluting cars on the planet .
The Cadillac Escalade is said to be among the most polluting cars on the planetCredit : BackGrid But that motor — along with heat and carbon emissions from the 24,500sq ft eight-bed LA mansion they are using — is only a fraction of their footprint , a study by former MP Norman Baker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carbon dioxide a year from flights against the UK average of 8.3 tons for one person , it is claimed .
They racked up at least 53 international flights in the 12 months to the end of January 2020 , says the Lib Dem politician .
Mr Baker insisted : “ The only thing green about Prince Harry are his wellies.
” “ The self-appointed eco-warrior , who likes to lecture everybody else on climate change , is in the top one per cent of people on the planet for carbon emissions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if not , at least cut the crap.
” Harry spent £6,000 on a chopper trip to Birmingham in March last year , days before telling kids about climate change at Wembley .
The Prince , 35 , told them : “ Climate change is a humanitarian issue and one where we ’ ve been far too slow in waking up to and acting on the damaging impact our living is having on the world.
” The post ‘ Eco-Warriors ’ Meghan and Harry ’ s Carbon Footprint Could Be 26 Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .


climatedepot--2020-07-22--Antarctic ‘Doomsday Glacier’ Is Really Doomsday for Climate Alarmism

A fake climate scare making headlines comes from researchers who say West Antarctica ’ s Thwaites glacier may soon collapse , raising sea levels by 6 feet or more over the next century .
Alarmists are dubbing this the “ Doomsday Glacier.
” This is ironically true , as the fake climate scare of the Doomsday Glacier is really a doomsday for climate alarmism .
The Financial Times ( FT ) in an article titled , “ Climate change : what Antarctica ’ s ‘ doomsday glacier ’ means for the planet , ” writes , “ if Thwaites goes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half of Antarctica would lead to between 2m and 3m of sea level rise… a rise that would be catastrophic for most coastal cities.
” The FT article implies climate change is behind the Thwaites glacier ’ s rate of asserted melting and instability , ignoring evidence to the contrary .
I debunked that claim in a July 3 Climate Realism post in which I pointed out global satellite data showed no warming or cooling trend at the South Pole since measurements began in 1979 .
In addition , since 1998 , ground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continent has cooled for 20 of the last 30 years .
So how can global warming cause alleged instability of the Thwaites glacier ?
It simply can not .
Throughout geologic history , West Antarctica is also referred to as Lesser Antarctica , being the smaller half of the continent .
The ice there has been unstable , with many regions , including regions in an around the Thwaites glacier , underpinned by subsurface volcanic activity .
Moreover , “ During past interglacials , the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has been completely removed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any decline of the Thwaites glacier and other areas of West Antarctica , it is not even clear if Antarctica is adding to recent modest sea level rise .
In 2015 , NASA reported Antarctica as a whole was adding tens of thousands of tons of snow and ice each year in its interior .
NASA wrote , “ the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001 .
That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at least through 2008 , Antarctica ice change was , on net , reducing the rate of global sea level rise .
Alarmists , ironically , point to other studies that they claim place the NASA findings in doubt .
Regardless , Antarctica ’ s average temperatures range from -60 degrees C ( -76 F ) during winter to -20 C ( -4 F ) in summer .
Accordingly , no meltdown of the Antarctic continent is in the offing .
The so-called Doomsday Glacier is really Doomsday Nothing – other than a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The post Antarctic ‘ Doomsday Glacier ’ Is Really Doomsday for Climate Alarmismappeared first on Climate Realism .


climatedepot--2020-07-22--New Climate Summary Smokes Out Wildfire Myths

Wildfires throughout the United States have become much less extensive in recent decades as the climate has warmed , reports a new climate summary at the website Climate at a Glance .
Climate at a Glance is designed to provide policymakers , educators , students , and the general public compelling one- or two-page summaries destroying common global warming myths .
Each summary begins with a few short bullet-points to concisely summarize the topic , followed by one or two explanatory paragraphs and an illustrative graphic .
According to the new summary on U.S. wildfires : • Wildfires are far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case throughout the first half of the 20th century .
• Occasional upticks in current wildfire activity still result in far less land burnt than was the case throughout the early 20th century .
• Even the worst recent wildfire years burned only 1/5 to 1/2 as much land as typical wildfire years during the early 20th century • Drought is the key climate factor for wildfires .
As shown in Climate at a Glance : Drought , the United States in recent decades is benefiting from strikingly small amounts of drought .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ available here .
The U.S. Wildfires summary is available here .


climatedepot--2020-07-22--Bjorn Lomborg: The alarm about climate change is blinding us to sensible solutions

It wasn ’ t that long ago when much of the global elite had conclusively decided that climate change was @ @ @ @ @ priority .
Then came a massive sideswiping by a global pandemic , of which we @ @ @ @ @ wave , along with an equally massive global recession .
It serves as a timely @ @ @ @ @ cultivates one fear over others serves society poorly .


climatedepot--2020-07-22--New model proposed to reduce carbon footprint of mega-conferences – ‘Hosting conferences every secon

New model proposed to reduce carbon footprint of mega-conferences – ‘Hosting conferences every second year’ & ‘Virtual’ conferencing

Carbophobes tell conference goers to tie themselves in knots over a minor trace gas in the atmosphere that ’ s essential to plants , trees , vegetation etc .
It ’ s climate alarm time again .
– – – Prior to the global pandemic , climate researchers identified an uncomfortable truth : the very meetings and events meant to support the fight against climate change were themselves causing vast greenhouse gas emissions through international air travel , says Phys.org .
Building on learnings from the COVID-19 pandemic , the University of Otago ’ s Professor James Higham , of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oxford University colleagues Ph.D. student Milan Klöwer , Professor Myles Allen and Associate Professor Debbie Hopkins have identified new measures that may reduce the carbon footprint of conference travel by up to 90 % .
The study is published this week in the journal Nature .
“ We ’ ve arrived at a new model that will be required to bring the carbon footprint of international conferences down .
The model can apply to small regional conferences as well , ” Professor Higham says .
Lead author Milan Klöwer says the model identifies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ selecting venues to minimize transport emissions , hosting conferences every second year to instantly cut travel by 50 % , and creating hubs so people travel shorter distances to still benefit from networking while linking virtually to other hubs .
Researchers found the sum total of travel associated with attendance at one large academic conference can release as much CO2 as an entire city in a week .
For the American Geophysical Union ’ s conference held in San Francisco last December , it is estimated the 28,000 delegates traveled 285 million kilometers—almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sun .


climatedepot--2020-07-22--Princess Charles’ sister, Prince Anne, declares she is a climate skeptic: ‘I don’t go down the clima

Princess Charles’ sister, Prince Anne, declares she is a climate skeptic: ‘I don’t go down the climate change route’ – ‘Climate changes all the time. It has done so throughout the globe’s history, so there’s nothing new under the sun’

Enthusing about genetically modified crops and dismissing the effects of climate change and veganism couldn ’ t be further away from the green views of Prince Charles .
But these are the very forthright opinions of his sister , Princess Anne .
Giving a rare interview to mark her 70th birthday next month , the Queen ’ s fiercely independent daughter jokes that her conversations with her elder brother are by necessity ‘ short ’ due to their wildly differing opinions .
Charles has openly lobbied against genetically modified crops , but Anne counters : ‘ It has been an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world to use GM wisely for very specific environments .
‘ It makes it much more likely to be able to grow what you need .
‘ I have to remind people that rapeseed oil was only made non-toxic to humans by the Canadians after the Second World War by genetically modifying the plant .
‘ It ’ s [ ironically ] quite popular with all those people who don ’ t like GM.
’ Asked if she and Charles have conversations about farming , she quips : ‘ Yes… occasionally , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t go down the climate change route ’ The princess was speaking to Australian Women ’ s Weekly magazine via a video call from Gatcombe Park , the 500-acre Gloucestershire estate and farm where she has spent lockdown .
Princes William and Harry as well as Charles have linked last year ’ s devastating Australian bushfires to climate change , but Anne said : ‘ I don ’ t even go down the climate change route .
‘ I think the way people manage ground is part of the discussion… Climate changes all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ throughout the globe ’ s history , so there ’ s nothing new under the sun .
‘ Somehow , we ’ ve got to learn that our kind of life is changing .
We ’ ve got to remember to respect what ’ s out there and how to live with it.
’ Talking with admiration of Australia ’ s indigenous population , she said : ‘ They ’ ve got a lot more knowledge and I suspect their ability to pass on the relevant knowledge is better than us .
‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understanding of what the dangers are , and fire would have been a massive danger throughout their existence .
‘ They know Australia a lot better than anybody else .
I suspect they existed in quite a lot of climate changes already .
’


climatedepot--2020-07-22--EU Leaders Slash Climate Funding To Save COVID Relief Package

After four days of bitter wrangling , EU leaders have struck a deal on a coronavirus recovery package after they agreed to cut climate funding by more than half .
According to Reuters , the Just Transition Fund ( which intends to wean member states of using fossil fuels ) will only receive 17.5 billion euros from the EU recovery fund and budget – down from the 37.5 billion euros set aside the original proposal .
The EU ’ s heads of government agreed on a €750bn package aimed at funding post-pandemic efforts to revive Europe ’ s economies which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recession .
According to news reports , nearly half of all climate funding from the EU ’ s 2021-2027 budget will be handed out to farmers .
In recent days , the European Court of Auditors has criticized the European Commission ’ s accounting tricks of so-called climate funding .
It revealed that the Commission substantially overestimated the amount it spent on preventing global warming — by handing out billions of Euros in cash subsidies to farmers , and simply counting these agricultural subsidies as ‘ climate funding ’ .
BRUSSELS ( Reuters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the menu as European Union leaders sat down to negotiate over dinner , aiming to clinch a deal after four days of summit wrangling over a huge stimulus plan to help rebuild their coronavirus-hit economies .
EU Council President Charles Michel presented a new proposal to the 27 leaders on Monday evening before talks resumed , tabling cuts to climate change schemes as part of a bid to rework the overall package into something all countries could agree to .
The proposal earmarked 30 % of both the EU budget and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for climate protection , and said all spending must comply with a principle to “ do no harm ” to EU green goals .
But it slashed the size of the EU ’ s Just Transition Fund , its flagship pot of money to help wean countries off fossil fuels .
The Just Transition Fund will now receive a combined 17.5 billion euros from the EU recovery fund and budget – down from the 37.5 billion euros set aside in a previous proposal .


climatedepot--2020-07-23--Cancel Culture Goes After Famed Environmentalist Shellenberger after his apology for climate scare

We hoped everyone enjoyed grilled hamburgers and hotdogs this Independence Day holiday without worrying too much about sending some carbon dioxide into the air .
Michael Shellenberger ’ s new book , “ Apocalypse Never : Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All , ” explains why most forms of renewable energy are bad for the environment and not practical for the world ’ s energy needs .
He has been a climate and environmental activist for more than 30 years and is the founder of Environmental Progress .
But chances are very few people have heard much about the book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alarmist doctrine .
John Robson , a writer for the Canada ’ s National Post , wrote in a June 30 , 2020 , article , “ Forbes Falls to Cancel Culture as it Erases Environmentalist ’ s Mea Culpa , ” that the magazine “ removed an article by noted environmentalist Michael Shellenberger in which he ‘ apologized ’ for the ‘ climate scare.
’ ” Robson said , “ It ’ s big news when somebody prominent apologizes for being badly wrong on a major public matter , promises to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do the same , right ?
Unless the person commits heresy like , say , Michael Shellenberger.
” According to Robson , in spite of Shellenberger ’ s impeccable environmental credentials , the cancel culture decided to disavow any knowledge of his past actions after his Forbes article stated , “ On behalf of environmentalists everywhere , I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years .
Climate change is happening .
It ’ s just not the end of the world .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem.
” The article quickly disappeared from the Forbes website and Robson inquired why it was removed .
He said the magazine ’ s explanation was something that would make any “ seasoned politician or bureaucrat blush ” as they replied , “ You can attribute the below statement to a Forbes spokesperson : Forbes requires its contributors to adhere to strict editorial guidelines .
This story did not follow those guidelines , and was removed.
” Robson wrote that the “ internet is a really lousy place to hide things ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ removed .
He pointed out that the website WattsUpWithThat.com has archived the Shellenberger ’ s persona non grata piece .
The Washington Times wrote in a July 1 column that Shellenberger “ got off to a rocky start with his book launch when Forbes deactivated his column apologizing for the ‘ climate scare , ’ but the magazine may have done him a favor.
” By doing so , the magazine created a backlash and provided a lot of publicity for his book just before its official release .
The Times wrote , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rarity , a major release by a prestigious publisher that refutes widely repeated environmental talking points ; accuses climate activists of misleading the public and contends that policy solutions such as green energy are making matters worse.
” Shellenberger told the Times that many of the renewable energy sources are worse for the environment than fossil fuels because it requires more land , more materials , more mining , more metals , and more waste .
Citizens Against Government Waste discussed some of the problems caused by renewable energy , in particular solar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post , the “ Green New Deal and the Environmental Damage it Would Cause.
” The blog pointed out that a study by Paul Driessen at the Heartland Institute found it would take 18.7 million solar panels , equal to a land mass the size of New York and Vermont combined , to replace all the fossil fuel and nuclear power we currently use .
John Tierney penned in a June 21 , 2020 Wall Street Journal book review , “ Apocalypse Never Review : False Gods for Lost Souls , ” how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world and crisply debunks myth after gloomy myth .
No , we are not in the midst of the ‘ sixth mass extinction , ’ because only 0.001 % of the planet ’ s species go extinct annually .
No , whales were not saved by Greenpeace but rather by the capitalist entrepreneurs who discovered cheaper substitutes for whale oil ( first petroleum , then vegetable oils ) that decimated the whaling industry long before activists got involved .
No , plastics don ’ t linger for thousands of years in the ocean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sunlight and other forces .
No , climate change has not caused an increase in the frequency or intensity of floods , droughts , hurricanes and tornadoes.
” Tierney cited how Shellenberger became disillusioned with his “ New Apollo Project , ” a forerunner to Rep. Alexander Ocasio-Cortez ’ s Green New Deal .
While many of its ideas were adopted by President Obama ’ s administration and received more than $ 150 billion in federal funding , a disproportionate share “ went to companies that enriched donors to the Obama campaign but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shellenberger deserves a lot of credit for releasing this book and clearly , he did not do it lightly .
He said in the Forbes ’ article , “ Until last year , I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare .
Partly that ’ s because I was embarrassed .
After all , I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist .
For years , I referred to climate change as an ‘ existential ’ threat to human civilization , and called it a ‘ crisis.
’ But mostly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of losing friends and funding for speaking out and that he “ mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public.
” Mr. Shellenberger ’ s book should be a good and interesting read , especially as the Green New Deal becomes a bigger topic of conversation for the 2020 election .
By standing up to the environmental alarmism mob and its apocalyptic future by telling the truth , Shellenberger may find he gains more friends and a thankful country , along with a more industrialized , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world , which should certainly not be cancelled .


climatedepot--2020-07-23--The environmentalist’s apology: how Michael Shellenberger unsettled some of his prominent supporters

Excerpts : Respected MIT climate expert Prof Kerry Emanuel sits on a line-up of science advisers of Environmental Progress .
He told Guardian Australia he was “ very concerned ” about the opinion piece , and was consulting with other members of the advisory group before deciding whether to remain listed .
Emanuel said he joined the thinktank some years ago “ as it was then a voice for a rational approach to dealing with climate change , emphasising the need for nuclear power as part of the solution – a point I still very much agree with ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the University of Adelaide , was asked by Shellenberger to read his book and gave it a glowing review .
He told Guardian Australia he thought the book “ may well be the most important book on the environment ever written ” .
But he said the way the opinion piece had framed the issue of climate change would put Shellenberger in a difficult position .
“ I think that Michael has gone a little too far and he will have to defend this article for many years and , in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as his words may be misrepresented by people who don ’ t believe in human-caused global warming , ” Wigley said .


climatedepot--2020-07-23--Climate Hysteria Has Killed Academic Freedom – Peter Ridd loses, we all lose

On 2 May 2018 , Professor Peter Ridd was sacked by James Cook University for serious misconduct .
It all started when he called-out his colleague Terry Hughes for falsely claiming healthy inshore coral reefs were dead from climate change and deteriorating water quality .
Ignoring the first censure in April 2016 , Professor Ridd went on television in August 2017 and explained in an interview with Alan Jones and Peta Credlin why so much said and written about the Great Barrier Reef , including by scientists at the Australian Institution of Marine Science , is ‘ untrustworthy ’ .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I edited , Climate Change : The Facts 2017 .
The book , published by the Institute of Public Affairs , begins with a chapter about the Great Barrier Reef in which the orthodoxy on Great Barrier Reef science is challenged , in particular reporting on coral calcification rates .
In that interview – that contributed directly to Peter Ridd ’ s sacking – the main argument was , and continues to be , for better quality assurance of coral reef science .
It is a fact that the Australian Institute of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of coral growth data – because it contradicts the claims of high-profile activists that coral growth rates are in decline .
They are not .
But the false claims are central to their fundraising strategy .
Never mind the truth .
The first finding handed down by Judge Salvatore Vasta back in April last year case concerned the photographs taken in 1994 that Terry Hughes used to falsely claim Acropora corals that were alive in 1890 are now all dead .
Peter Ridd had photographs taken in 2015 showing live Acropora and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claims .
Judge Vasta found in favour of Peter Ridd and ordered that the 17 findings made by the University , the two speech directions , the five confidentiality directions , the no satire direction , the censure and the final censure given by the University and the termination of employment of Professor Ridd by the University were all unlawful .
It was very significant that Peter Ridd won on the issue of academic freedom : that he did have a right to ignore the university administrators and continuing to speak out about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how and why important scientific institutions had become so untrustworthy .
The University never accepted that decision by the Federal Circuit Court , and they have never conceded that Terry Hughes was wrong to suggest all the corals were dead , when a documentary has since been made showing them to be alive .
Further , they have never supported any calls for the coral growth data to be made public .
Instead , the University appealed , and today the University won in the Federal Court .
In the judgement , Peter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as his ‘ personal opinion ’ .
It is not Peter Ridd ’ s personal opinion that the corals are alive , and the Great Barrier Reef resilient to climate change .
It is fact .
I ’ ve seen the coral reefs whose health is contested with my own eyes : they are very much alive .
What is dead is academic freedom in Australia .
Universities should be understood by the judiciary as different from other workplaces because it is expected by the ordinary Australian that , on occasions , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controversial issues .
It is essential that academics can engage in these debates without fearing that the use of plain and colloquial English could end their careers .
Yet today , the university ’ s appeal was upheld on the basis Peter Ridd was un-collegial in stating plainly that his own university and the Australian Institute of Marine Science are ‘ untrustworthy ’ because of systemic deficiencies in their quality assurance processes .
Further , it was mentioned that Peter Ridd did ‘ satirise ’ the university ’ s disciplinary processes in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ means that James Cook University , and other Australian universities , will continue to crush dissent and sack academics who campaign for the truth .
The post Climate Hysteria Has Killed Academic Freedom appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum ( GWPF ) .


climatedepot--2020-07-23--Peter Ridd and James Cook University: the Federal Court delivers a devastating blow against free spe

Peter Ridd and James Cook University: the Federal Court delivers a devastating blow against free speech

The Federal Court has devastating blow against mainstream Australians , against freedom of speech and against freedom of speech on climate change by overturning the earlier decision in the Federal Circuit Court which held that Dr Peter Ridd was unlawfully dismissed by James Cook University .
Alarmingly , this decision shows that contractual provisions guaranteeing intellectual freedom do not protect academics against censorship by university administrators .
The time has come for the Morrison Government to intervene .
This has been Australia ’ s David vs Goliath battle , with Peter Ridd on one side , backed by thousands of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other side who secured some of the most expensive legal representation in the country in Bret Walker SC to stifle the free speech of one of its own staff .
Dr Ridd , a professor of physics at JCU , was sacked by the university for misconduct for questioning in the IPA ’ s publication Climate Change : The Facts 2017 the climate change science around the Great Barrier Reef and for public statements made on the Jones & Co Sky News program .
He is now apparently considering his legal options in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court of Australia .
If he does decide to take up that fight , the Institute of Public Affairs – as well as thousands on mainstream Australians – will continue to support his fight for freedom of speech on climate change .
JCU has engaged some of the most expensive legal representation in the country to stifle the free speech of one of its own staff , despite crying poor about university funding in the wake of coronavirus .
It creates a massive chilling effect for any academic engaging in public debate in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actions prove without doubt there is a crisis of free speech at Australian universities .
Many academics are censured , but few are prepared to speak out and risk their career , particularly if faced with the prospect of legal battles and possible bankruptcy .
The case has identified a culture of censorship when it comes to challenging claims surrounding climate change and the Great Barrier Reef .
JCU to this date has never attempted to disprove claims made by Dr Ridd about the Great Barrier Reef .
That last sentence says it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news .
JCU succeeded on appeal .
We need to read the details but for the moment I would like to say the following .
Universities are different from other workplaces because it is expected that , on occasions , there will be vigorous debates on important and controversial issues .
It is essential that academics can engage in these debates without fearing that a wrong word could end their career .
Among my crimes was saying that universities in general were “ Orwellian ” because they only pretended to value free speech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years of evidence , that another institution ’ s work was untrustworthy because of systemic deficiencies in their quality assurance processes .
I “ satirised ” the university ’ s disciplinary processes against me by implying it was “ amusing ” .
If universities can crush any robust debate by deciding there is a lack of respect or collegiality , where does this leave an academic who might want to say something of which the administration might disapprove ?
Better to remain silent .
This case is not an isolated incidence of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim that Academic Freedom is “ in their DNA ” but their actions indicate otherwise .
And yet both State and Commonwealth governments continue to fund the universities and fail to insist on traditional standards of decency , academic freedom , and freedom of speech .
This is a failure of government as much as a failure of a university .
While JCU had its knee on the neck of free speech – our governments looked on and did nothing .
Fundamental concepts such as academic freedom of speech should not be decided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contract of a malignant university .
Higher protection is necessary .
This has always been a battle between the little people and the establishment .
I was fired for calling for better quality assurance of science of the GBR and climate change .
This science has been used to make government regulations causing major economic damage to Farmers and many other workers of the industries in North Queensland .
I was supported by donations from thousands of people .
I thank them all .
Also , thanks to my legal team .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so far not resulted in a better outcome .
I respect the decision of the Court .
I will be seeking legal advice as to my next steps .


climatedepot--2020-07-23--The Sierra Club: America’s oldest conservation group denounces racism of its founder John Muir

The oldest conservation group in the US , The Sierra Club , will take down monuments to its founder due to his racist history .
John Muir , who founded the group in 1892 and whose activism helped preserve the Yosemite Valley and Sequoia National Park , also had ties to white supremacists and made derogatory comments about Black and indigenous people that drew on deeply harmful racist stereotypes .
“ As the most iconic figure in Sierra Club history , Muir ’ s words and actions carry an especially heavy weight , ” a statement from Michael Brune , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ They continue to hurt and alienate Indigenous people and people of colour who come into contact with the Sierra Club.
” The oldest conservation group in the US , The Sierra Club , will take down monuments to its founder due to his racist history .
John Muir , who founded the group in 1892 and whose activism helped preserve the Yosemite Valley and Sequoia National Park , also had ties to white supremacists and made derogatory comments about Black and indigenous people that drew on deeply harmful racist stereotypes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sierra Club history , Muir ’ s words and actions carry an especially heavy weight , ” a statement from Michael Brune , executive director of the group , says .
“ They continue to hurt and alienate Indigenous people and people of colour who come into contact with the Sierra Club.
” As the US begins to confront its past with the removal of many statues related to the Confederacy , the group has decided to re-examine its own history and “ our substantial role in perpetuating white supremacy ” .
Muir @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was head of the New York Zoological Society and the board of trustees of the American Museum of Natural History — he also helped found the American Eugenics Society in the years following Muir ’ s death .
Other early Sierra Club members and leaders Mr Brune calls out in his statement include Joseph LeConte and David Starr Jordan , both vocal advocates for white supremacy and eugenics .
Jordan co-founded the Human Betterment Foundation , whose research and model laws were used to create Nazi Germany ’ s eugenics legislation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ defined by “ whiteness and privilege ” and allowed for wilful ignorance about the spaces the group enjoyed once being the homes of Native peoples , forced off their lands by white settlers .
Exclusionary membership practices continued until at least the 1960s .