News that doesn't receive the necessary attention.

Sunday, March 31, 2013

UK Committee on Climate Change chaired by business exec. who benefits if proclamations cling to flawed predictions as does Prince Charles

"The (UK) Committee on Climate Change, established by the 2008 Climate Change Act, advises the Government on setting ‘carbon budgets’ and CO2 emissions cuts. It is chaired by Lord Deben, who also heads Veolia Water UK, which connects windfarms to the National Grid."

3/30/13, "Government's climate watchdog launches astonishing attack on the Mail on Sunday... for revealing global warming science is wrong," UK Daily Mail, David Rose

"The official watchdog that advises the Government on greenhouse gas emissions targets has launched an astonishing attack on The Mail on Sunday – for accurately reporting that alarming predictions of global warming are wrong.

We disclosed that although highly influential computer models are still estimating huge rises in world temperatures, there has been no statistically significant increase for more than 16 years.

Despite our revelation earlier this month, backed up by a scientifically researched graph, the Committee on Climate Change still clings to flawed predictions.

Leading the attack is committee member Sir Brian Hoskins, who is also director of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College, London. In a blog on the Committee on Climate Change’s website, Sir Brian insisted: ‘The scientific basis for significant long-term climate risks remains robust, despite the points raised .  .  . Early and deep cuts in emissions are still required.’

He also claimed our report ‘misunderstood’ the value of computer models. Yet in an interview three years ago, Sir Brian conceded that when he started out as a climate scientist, the models were ‘pretty lousy, and they’re still pretty lousy, really’.

Our graph earlier this month was reproduced from a version first drawn by Dr Ed Hawkins, of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science. Last week it was reprinted as part of a four-page report in The Economist.
The accuracy of computer forecasts is vital because they influence politicians and their key environmental advisers on how urgently to act on climate change – and how many billions of pounds they take from the taxpayer in ‘green’ levies.

The Committee on Climate Change claims such forecasts must be right because world temperatures have previously matched computer models’ ‘outputs’ for most of the past 60 years

Yet as this newspaper pointed out, for almost all of that 60-year period the models were not making predictions – because they did not yet exist.

Instead, the models had recently been making ‘hindcasts’ – backward projections based on climate simulations and tailored to actual temperatures. The evidence shows the models collapse when they try to forecast the future....

David Whitehouse, of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, said the graph showed models were so unreliable that ‘if this kind of data were from a drugs trial it would have been stopped long ago’.
And last week, The Economist repeated our claims that many scientists now believe that previous estimates of ‘climate sensitivity’ – how much the world will warm each time the level of carbon dioxide doubles – are far too high.

In a key 2007 report, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggested this was most likely to be about 3C, with 4.5C considered ‘likely’. However, recent research suggests the true figure is much lower – between 1.5C and 2C – giving the world many more decades to avoid disaster through effective new technologies.

The Committee on Climate Change, established by the 2008 Climate Change Act, advises the Government on setting ‘carbon budgets’ and CO2 emissions cuts. It is chaired by Lord Deben, who also heads Veolia Water UK, which connects windfarms to the National Grid." via Tom Nelson

graph from UK Daily Mail, data from Nat. Center for Atmospheric Science, Dr. Ed Hawkins
They don't even pretend anymore. Steep new "climate change" taxes in UK going straight down the tubes to prop up the failed, organized crime infested, completely useless EU carbon trading system and to pay general gov. expenses:
3/31/13, "Energy bills to soar due to ‘stealth tax’,", K. Dorsey

"Energy-intensive industries are bracing themselves for a renewed surge in utility bills tomorrow when the UK government’s highly controversial Carbon Price Floor starts feeding through into energy costs.

Lambasted by business and environmental groups as a “stealth tax”, the price floor is expected to raise up to £3.2 billion over the next three years.

Although critics say the funds should be ploughed back into the green energy technologies that the price floor is intended to support, the money will instead be absorbed for general use by the cash-strapped Exchequer....
The net effect will be to take money out of a fragile economy, with firms committing more of their cash to meet rising operating costs. 

“That is the first call, and will come before investment in growth and new jobs,” Murphy added....
The UK government has said it will compensate those at risk of being driven out of business via a £250 million package of support, but details of how this will work have not been finalised....
The UK levy is intended to drive investment in low-carbon technologies by propping up the current low price for the “right to pollute” under the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS)."... 
11/23/11, "Europe's $287 billion carbon 'waste': UBS report," The Australian, by Sid Maher
"SWISS banking giant UBS says the European Union's emissions trading scheme has cost the continent's consumers $287 billion for "almost zero impact" on cutting carbon emissions."...EU CO2 trading provided "windfall profits" to participants paid for by "electricity customers.""
12/1/10, "EU Carbon permits missing from registry due to (computer) virus," Reuters, Nina Chestney

"One million European carbon permits (valued at $19.54 million US) have gone missing from the Romanian subsidiary of cement company Holcim's (HOLN.VX) emissions registry account due to a computer virus,

  • the EU Commission said on Wednesday."...
2/1/2011, "Austria Asks Sweden to Return Carbon Permits Worth $3.9 Million," Bloomberg,
"Organized crime may be responsible for theft of European Union emission allowances this month, and national authorities are working with Europol...a top EU climate official said." Sweden admits it has Austria's stolen 'carbon credits' but says it might just be 'a coincidence.'"...

6/14/11, "Europe tackles huge fraud," Nature, "Regulators scramble to recover millions of euros awarded to fake research projects."

"They are prosecuting members of a large network accused of pocketing more than €50 million (US$72 million) in EC (European Commission) grants for fake research projects.... Investigations are still under way in the United Kingdom, France, Greece, Austria, Sweden, Slovenia and Poland."...
7/16/10, "Carbon Trading Used as Money-Laundering Front," Jakarta Globe


10/8/10, "Murder on the Carbon Express: Interpol Takes On Emissions Fraud," Mother Jones, M. Schapiro


12/10/09, "$7.4 billion lost from carbon trading fraud in Europe." NY Times Green blog


12/28/10, "Europol Arrests More Than 100 In Carbon Trading Fraud," P. Gosselin, NoTricksZone

"Here’s more proof that trading of CO2 emission certificates is fraught with fraud and attracts seedy criminal organizations – all costing the consumers and taxpayers billions.

Worse yet, it has spread out of control and appears that the authorities can’t keep up."...


11/14/10, "Climate policy distributes the world's new wealth," NZZ, am Sonntag, German press, interview with former co-chair of the UN IPCC Ottmar Edenhofer" a German economist.


4/20/10, "Buying Carbon offsets may ease eco-guilt but not global warming," CSM, by Doug Struck.

""We do worry a lot that there is not much coordination between those working on the taxation, the regulation and the pricing of carbon," said IETA's Derwent."...

5/30/11, "Exclusive: EU energy plan threatens carbon billions," Reuters, Pete Harrison
"The Europe Union's carbon market could be flooded with excess pollution permits over the next decade, cutting prices in half and depriving governments of billions in budgeted revenues, EU sources say.

"There's a real concern of negative impacts on prices if the issue is not properly addressed," one EU source said on condition of anonymity. "Some of the studies imply that carbon prices will collapse."

It is not clear, however, whether European governments will support measures that would erode carbon prices, which would put a severe dent in budgeted government revenues in 2013-2020."...

Prince Charles has restructured the UK monarchy's income stream so that a large part of it will derive from offshore wind turbine lease fees. The financial survival of the UK monarchy therefore relies on people believing in CO2 terror. Then there's the EU. Both these parasites, the monarchy and the EU, rely on the world (not just Europeans) believing in non-existent man-caused CO2 terror. Even if such a thing existed, it's entirely in the hands of China. Nothing the UK (or the US) does from now on can effect global CO2 or offset what China does. If the NY Times and Washington Post came out and admitted this, and dropped the whole subject of 'climate,' it would be over. 
10/24/10, “Queen’s £38m a year windfarm windfall,” This is money, by Martin Delgado and Christopher Leake

“Experts predict the growth in offshore windfarms could be worth up to £250m a year to the Crown Estate….’It is wholly inappropriate that the Palace should have such a direct interest in a subject like windfarms, given Prince Charles’s obsession with renewable energy. It raises the question as to whether he is seeking to increase his 

each time he makes a favourable reference to wind power.’”

“”Mutual benefit: Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohammad bin Zayed al-Nahayan has been friends with Prince Andrew since childhood.”
10/31/2010, Andrew’s friend the Abu Dhabi princeand the £3billion windfarm off Britain that could earn the Queen millions,” UK Daily Mail
, Ian Gallagher and George Arbuthnott 
and lobby EU for EU to increase its power:
"The European Commission is spending millions of euros each year funding ‘civil society’ groups which act as cheerleaders for greater political and economic integration.   
  A new report Euro Puppets: The European Commission’s remaking of civil society shows the extent to which taxpayers’ money is channelled towards organisations which 

campaign for EU institutions to be given more money and power....

The ‘Green 10’ represents the largest of Europe’s environmental lobby groups. All but one of their members receives substantial funding from the EU (proportion of income provided by the EU shown below):

o    Birdlife Europe: €332,163 (35%)

o    CEE Bankwatch Network: €836,238 (45%)

o    Climate Action Network Europe: €295,022 (33%)

o    European Environmental Bureau: €894,000 (41%)

o    European Federation for Transport and Environment: €275,516 (16%)

o    Health and Environment Alliance: €362,992 (59%)

o    Friends of the Earth Europe: €1,195,259 (46%)

o    Naturefriends: €365,735 (41%)

o    WWF European Policy Office: €599,954 (13%)

Outside Europe, the EU has awarded grants to such groups as Friends of the Earth International (€814,243), WWF Pakistan (€1.6 million) and WWF Indonesia (€0.5 million). ‘The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements’ has been awarded €450,000 to promote organic farming in North Korea.

 80% of the ‘civil society’ groups which are members of the alliance which supports the 2013 European Year of Citizens receive funding from the EU. The majority rely on the EU for more than half of their income.
·         The Union of European Federalists received €110,000 (63% of its income).

·         The International Union of Socialist Youth receives €50,000 each year from the EU.

·         As well as receiving extensive funding for the World Service, the BBC also received a specific grant for EU integration of €355,000....
Taxpayers’ money used to promote the EU
Civil society groups in non-member countries are another funding priority for the Commission. In 2012/13, its Neighbourhood Civil Society Facility had a €45.3 million budget to be distributed to groups in Eastern Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. Many EU grants have been given to projects such as:

·         Combating Euroskepticism and Promoting Active European Citizenship’ (Hungary)

·         Unite Unite Europe!’ (Serbia)

·         ‘Be Active, Be European!’ (Albania)

·         ‘Citizen of my country, citizen of my Europe!!’ (Kosovo)"...

Commenting on the report, its author, Christopher Snowdon, said:

“It is astonishing that a supposedly democratic body is spending so much taxpayer money supporting political lobby groups. The EU doesn’t want to hear what ordinary Europeans think of it so it has created a parody of civil society which is more supportive.
“Inevitably, much of this money is spent lobbying for larger budgets for unpopular causes. The question must be asked – why does the EU feel it must spend so much money promoting its own popularity?”"


Ed. note: Please excuse unpleasant white background behind part of this post. It was put there by hackers whom I believe to be from google. I know of no way to prevent it.

Phony celebrity city mayors not interested in reducing 'gun violence,' Chicago, NY and LA drop even lower in fed. gun crime prosecutions, rank 88, 89, and 90 out of 90 districts-US News

3/28/13, "Chicago, Los Angeles, New York Prosecuted Fewest Federal Gun Crimes," US News, Elizabeth Flock

"The districts that contain Chicago, Los Angeles and New York City ranked last in terms of federal gun law enforcement in 2012, according to a new report from Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which tracks federal data.

Federal gun crimes include illegal possession of a firearm in a school zone, illegal sale of a firearm to a juvenile, felon, or drug addict, and illegal transport of a firearm across state lines. In Chicago, the majority of gun charges last year were for firearms violations.

The districts of Eastern New York, Central California, and Northern Illinois ranked 88th, 89th and 90th, respectively, out of 90 districts, in prosecutions of federal weapons crimes per capita last year, but it wasn't always this way. All three districts fell lower on the list than they had been in years past. In 2010, for example, Chicago was 78th in federal weapons prosecutions.

These cities also have some of the nation's most restrictive gun laws, as well as the most active mayors in championing gun control. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa are all members of the national Mayors Against Illegal Guns campaign.

D.C., which also has tough gun laws, was in the lower half of the list in 2012, coming in at 78th. In 2011, D.C. prosecuted a higher number of gun crimes, coming in at number 49.

National Rifle Association chief Wayne LaPierre first pointed to the report on Meet the Press Sunday, when he demanded to know why the national press corps wasn't asking the White House or U.S. attorneys general to explain lax federal enforcement of gun laws....

Requests for comment from the U.S. Attorney's offices in New York and California were not immediately returned. But the U.S. attorney's office in the Northern District of Illinois maintains that federal weapons law enforcement is among the top priorities of their office....

The TRAC report notes that many more gun arrests happen at the state and local level than happen at the federal level, and that it's difficult to assess how many prosecutions happen overall.

While the districts that ranked lowest last year for federal gun crime prosecutions all contained major cities, the districts at the top of the list for its enforcement were almost exclusively rural. The districts of Southern Alaska, Kansas and Western Tennessee ranked first, second and third in prosecmutions of federal weapons laws per capita last year.

Susan Long, a statistician and co-director of TRAC, said the data revealed a stronger federal enforcement presence in rural areas than urban ones. "If taxpayers of [a certain area] don't pass strong gun control measures ... the feds pick up the ball," she said. "But now we've got sequestration cutting back on all these resources."

The U.S. court system has said that sequestration will have a major impact on the federal judiciary, including the furlough of some court employees, cuts to the federal defenders' office and fewer probation officers for criminal offenders."
via Michael Savage

Many UK doctors fear sending relatives to National Health Service hospitals, view them as substandard

3/30/13, "GPs fear sending their relations to hospitals," UK Telegraph, Laura Donnelly

"Almost half of family doctors and practice nurses do not believe their local hospitals are good enough to treat their own families, a poll has found."

Victoria Vaughan, the editor-in-chief of Campden Health, the publishing and research company which conducted the poll, said: “If GPs wouldn’t want their own family members referred to their local hospital then there is clearly something wrong.”"...(near end of article) via Michael Savage 


Pass the kleenex to Joe Romm--it's pouring rain in Texas

"Houston Astros fan runs through the rain outside the stadium before the Astros' season opener baseball game against the Texas Rangers on Sunday, March 31, 2013, in Houston," AP/Houston Chronicle


Friday, March 29, 2013

Feb. 2013 Deutsche Bank report predicts soaring coal consumption and auto sales in China in next decade, Communist Party legitimacy based on rapidly expanding economy-NY Times

3/29/13, "Cost of Environmental Damage in China Growing Rapidly Amid Industrialization," NY Times, Edward Wong

"The cost of environmental degradation in China was about $230 billion in 2010, or 3.5 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product — three times that in 2004, in local currency terms, an official Chinese news report said this week. 

The statistic came from a study by the Chinese Academy of Environmental Planning, which is part of the Ministry of Environmental Protection. 

The figure of $230 billion, or 1.54 trillion renminbi, is based on costs arising from pollution and damage to the ecosystem, the price that China is paying for its rapid industrialization. 

This cuts to the heart of China’s economic challenge: how to transform from the explosive growth of the past 30 years to the sustainable growth of the next 30 years,” said Alistair Thornton, a China economist at the research firm IHS Global Insight. “Digging a hole and filling it back in again gives you G.D.P. growth. It doesn’t give you economic value. A lot of the activity in China over the last few years has been digging holes to fill them back in again — anything from bailing out failing solar companies to ignoring the ‘externalities’ of economic growth.” 

And the costs could be even higher than the ministry’s estimate, he said. The $230 billion figure is incomplete because the researchers did not have a complete set of data. Making such calculations is “notoriously difficult,” he said. 

The 2010 figure was reported on Monday by a newspaper associated with the ministry, and so far only partial results of the study are available. In 2006, the ministry began releasing an estimate of the cost of environmental degradation. But the ministry has issued statistics only intermittently, not on an annual basis, though its original goal was to do the calculation annually. 

The rapidly eroding environment across the country has become an issue of paramount concern to many Chinese. In January, outrage boiled over as air pollution in north China reached record levels, well beyond what Western environmental agencies consider hazardous. The public fury forced propaganda officials to allow official Chinese news organizations to report more candidly on the pollution. 

Chinese state-owned enterprises in the oil and power industries have consistently blocked efforts by pro-environment government officials to impose policies that would alleviate the pollution. 

There have also been constant concerns over water and soil pollution. The discovery of at least 16,000 dead pigs in rivers that supply drinking water to Shanghai has ignited alarm there. This week, China Central Television reported that farmers in a village in Henan Province were using wastewater from a paper mill to grow wheat. But one farmer said they would not dare to eat the wheat themselves. It is sold outside the village, perhaps ending up in cities, while the farmers grow their own wheat with well water. 

The Beijing government on Thursday released details of a three-year plan that is aimed at curbing various forms of pollution, according to a report on Friday in China Daily, an official English-language newspaper. The report quoted Wang Anshun, Beijing’s mayor, as saying that sewage treatment, garbage incineration and forestry development would cost at least $16 billion. 

In 2006, the environmental ministry said the cost of environmental degradation in 2004 was more than $62 billion, or 3.05 percent of G.D.P. In 2010, it released partial results for 2008 that totaled about $185 billion, or 3.9 percent of G.D.P. Several foreign scholars have criticized the methods by which Chinese researchers have reached those numbers, saying some critical measures of environmental degradation are not included in the calculations. 

There is consensus now that China’s decades of double-digit economic growth exacted an enormous environmental cost. But growth remains the priority; the Communist Party’s legitimacy is based largely on rapidly expanding the economy, and China officially estimates that its G.D.P., which was $8.3 trillion in 2012, will grow at a rate of 7.5 percent this year and at an average of 7 percent in the five-year plan that runs to 2015. A Deutsche Bank report released last month said the current growth policies would lead to a continuing steep decline of the environment for the next decade, especially given the expected coal consumption and boom in automobile sales."


Thursday, March 28, 2013

UK Met Office caught flubbing a 3 month weather forecast in 2012, BBC acquired dox via FOI, Met Office had withheld due to 'barbecue summer' embarrassment

3/28/13, "Met Office three-month forecast was 'not helpful'," BBC, Roger Harrabin

Between March and April 2012, the UK experienced an extraordinary shift from high pressure and drought to low pressure and downpours. 

But the Met Office said the forecast for average rainfall "slightly" favoured drier than average conditions.

The three-month forecast is said to be experimental. 

It is sent to contingency planners but has been withheld from the public since the Met Office was pilloried for its "barbecue summer" forecast.

Last spring's forecast has been obtained by BBC News under Freedom of Information. 

The Met Office three-monthly outlook at the end of March stated: 

"The forecast for average UK rainfall slightly favours drier than average conditions for April-May-June, and slightly favours April being the driest of the three months."

A soul-searching Met Office analysis later confessed: "Given that April was the wettest since detailed records began in 1910 and the April-May-June quarter was also the wettest, this advice was not helpful."

In a note to the government chief scientist, the Met Office chief scientist Julia Slingo explains the difficulty of constructing long-distance forecasts, given the UK's position at the far edge of dominant world weather systems." photo of Roger Harrabin from BBC


Obama to annex up to 1 million acres because of global warming, says need to protect wildlife from mining, oil production, farming, and ranching-LA Times

This plan shows a complete denial of the federal government's own recent scientific data that US CO2 has dropped for many years and is heading lower. The drop is so significant that scientists expected US energy policy to change to reflect reduced concern for US CO2. As to global CO2, US CO2 could go to zero and it would have little to no effect on the planet because China's already high emissions are heading higher. 1000 new coal plants are planned with 800 going to China and India. Some attribute US leading the world in reduction of CO2 emissions to over two decades of spending and mandates and devotion of 13 federal agencies to CO2 and the environment. Those who care about the environment and wildlife should rejoice at their achievement instead of denying it. They won! Some might even thank millions of American taxpayers for their decades of sacrifice. Those who started the 'climate' industry didn't expect US CO2 to drop as quickly and steadily as it has so billions have been bet on the opposite outcome, ie that US CO2 would continue upward. Obama knows US CO2 has dropped but he can only mention it in passing because it means the end of the CO2 "scare" industry. Certainly the GOP isn't going to say anything meaningful about this. And the media just does government PR as evidenced by this LA Times article:

3/27/13, "Federal plan aims to help wildlife adapt to climate change," LA Times, N. Banerjee

"The Obama administration Tuesday announced a nationwide plan to help wildlife adapt to threats from climate change.

Developed along with state and tribal authorities, the strategy seeks to preserve species as global warming alters their historical habitats and, in many cases, forces them to migrate across state and tribal borders.

Over the next five years, the plan establishes priorities for what will probably be a decades-long effort. One key proposal is to create wildlife "corridors" that would let animals and plants move to new habitats. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Daniel M. Ashe said such routes could be made through easements and could total "much more than 1 million acres." The plan does not provide an estimate of the cost.

The effects of climate change are already apparent, the plan notes. Oyster larvae are struggling off the Northwest coast. In the Atlantic, fish are migrating north and into deeper waters. Geese and ducks do not fly as far south. In the West, bark beetles destroy pines because winters are not cold enough to kill infestations.
The plan, called the National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy, does not prioritize species to target, although "the polar bear is the poster child" of wildlife threatened by global warming, Ashe said.

But efforts have already begun to protect wildlife. The lesser prairie chicken in the Great Plains, for instance, also faces threats from mining, oil production, farming and ranching. Climate change models estimate that the chicken's habitat could undergo a 5-degree Fahrenheit rise in temperature and a drop in precipitation by 2060.
The federal government already pays ranchers
and farmers to remove land from production to create wildlife refuges. If native prairie were restored to 10% of that land, according to one analysis, that could offset the prairie chicken's projected population decline.

Recently, some state-level efforts to adapt to global warming have been stymied by politicians who reject climate science. In North Carolina, for instance, planning to build infrastructure along the coast that could withstand storm surges worsened by sea-level rise has been delayed. State politicians dismissed scientific models that predicted the rise by the end of the century.

But efforts to help wildlife adapt have not provoked a backlash so far, state and administration officials said in a conference call.
"With coastal communities, there are challenges with coral populations, with changing dynamics in fish population," said Eric Schwaab, assistant administrator for fisheries at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "So people are less focused on why and more focused on what's next."" via Lucianne


Ed. note: "Climate models" and  "scientific models" are cited in this article as if they're proof of something. One is left to believe state governments are criminals for apparently having knowledge that US CO2 is no longer a danger (assuming it ever was) and not turning their citizens over to so-called "models" by persons unaccountable to them, the taxpayers, or soldiers who died so their state might stay free. The author decided to deny science and side with all powerful government against the people. Again, US CO2 could go to zero, US humanity could be vacated and it wouldn't help global CO2. Even assuming CO2 causes sea levels to rise, we can do nothing about it. We have no control over China's CO2. But the LA Times won't say so. The article was short so space wasn't available to explain the full story of what actually has happened in the states mentioned. The author could have refrained from twice mentioning "models" knowing they couldn't be explained in this space but instead chose to do PR for government and billionaires in the CO2 terror industry. The author closes with a quote from a federal government bureaucrat suggesting some officials ask no questions and simply proceed on a massive plan to confiscate one million acres of US land that many fought and died for along with confiscating millions of hard earned taxpayer dollars to pay for this new bureaucracy about a vicious lie.


6/4/12,Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006,” Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage

“Not only that, but as my top chart shows, US CO2 emissions are falling even faster than what President Obama pledged in the global Copenhagen Accord.

Here is the biggest shocker of all: the average American’s CO2 emissions are down to levels not seen since 1964 --over half a century ago. …Coal is the number two source of CO2 for Americans. Today the average American burns an amount similar to what they did in 1955, and even less than they did in the 1940s. …It is exactly America’s historical role of biggest and dirtiest that   makes their sharp decline in CO2 pollution so noteworthy and potentially game changing at the global level.”...


 8/16/12, “AP IMPACT: CO2 emissions in US drop to 20-year low,” AP, Kevin Begos

In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years."...


 1/15/11, “Recession Special: Cleaner Air,“ NY Times, Matthew Wald

What the government has not mandated, the economy is doing on its own: emissions of global warming gases in the United States are down.

According to the Energy Department, carbon dioxide emissions peaked in this country in 2005 and will not reach that level again until the early 2020s.”…


4/21/12, Why [CO2] Emissions Are Declining in the U.S. But Not in Europe, by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus,
.As we note below in a new article for Yale360, a funny thing happened: U.S. emissions started going down in 2005 and are  expected to decline further over the next decade.”


News of US CO2 plunge has been described as:


2/26/13, "Tough Truths from China on CO2 and Climate," Andrew Revkin, NY Times, Dot Earth


1/12/13, "Greens Misread the Climate Tea Leaves," Walter Russell Mead, Via Meadia

"The gravest danger to Earth these days isn’t climate skepticism; it’s the broken, Malthusian and statist green policy imagination. Wedded to grandiose and unworkable “solutions”, greens feel they must push the panic button at every opportunity to stampede the world into embracing an unworkable and unsustainable policy agenda.

It won’t work. The Al Gore path (alarmism, hypocrisy, dumb policy solutions, green pig lipsticking or corporate subsidies disguised as green breakthroughs) will not bend the curve. Until the green movement internalizes this lesson and moves on, it will waste its energy on foolishness like the failed Kyoto Protocol and ethanol subsidies and greens will have little constructive impact on a planet they claim to love."


1/29/13, "China Uses Nearly as Much Coal as Rest of World Combined, EIA Says," Wall St. Journal, Cassandra Sweet 


Coal mining "more lucrative for Zetas than selling drugs."

"The infamous Zetas are diversifying, by muscling in on a business that can be "more lucrative than selling drugs.""


6/26/12, “The Incredible Shrinking Carbon Pollution Forecast – Part 2,”, Dan Lashof
.“Back in February I posted about a surprising development: Despite the failure of comprehensive climate and energy legislation in 2010, U.S. carbon pollution emissions and projections of future carbon pollution have been coming down ever since....

While there has been some press coverage of these facts (see here and here) I continue to find that most people are surprised to learn about this progress….



6/22/12, U.S. cuts greenhouse gases despite do-nothing Congress,” CNN, Steve Hargreaves  

Even factoring in a stronger economy, forecasters see  greenhouse gas emissions continuing to fall…. Others take the U.S. success in reducing its energy sector emissions as a sign that its fragmented, state-based, regulatory approach has worked better than Europe’s market-based cap-and-trade approach.”


Above, August, 2007: China’s industrial growth depends on coal, plentiful but polluting, from mines like this one in Shenmu, Shaanxi Province, behind a village store,” NY Times
1/31/13, "The Growing Irrelevance of U.S. Climate Policy," Marlo Lewis,


Ed. note: Civilized people care about clean air, clean water, and preserving our environment. That's something entirely different than claiming human CO2 is destroying the planet. There are real problems in the world that could use attention. A generation has allowed itself to be hijacked in service of non-existent CO2 terror. Many have suffered and many have died.



Blog Archive

About Me

My photo
I'm the daughter of an Eagle Scout (fan of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Mets) and a Beauty Queen.