George Soros gave Ivanka's husband's business a $250 million credit line in 2015 per WSJ. Soros is also an investor in Jared's business.

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Obama team in 2009 said his cap and trade program to prevent US children from being injured or killed by US CO2 would cost 1% of US GDP annually-CBS News, FOIA docs.

"A second memorandum, which was prepared for Obama's transition team after the November election, says this about climate change policies: "Economic costs will likely be on the order of 1 percent of GDP."
 
9/15/2009, "Obama Admin: Cap And Trade Could Cost Families $1,761 A Year," CBSNews, Declan McCullagh

"The Obama administration has privately concluded that a cap and trade law would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year, the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent

A previously unreleased analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Treasury says the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. At the upper end of the administration's estimate, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year.

A second memorandum, which was prepared for Obama's transition team after the November election, says this about climate change policies: "Economic costs will likely be on the order of 1 percent of GDP, making them equal in scale to all existing environmental regulation."

The documents (PDF) were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute and released on Tuesday. 


Because personal income tax revenues bring in around $1.37 trillion a year, a $200 billion additional tax would be the equivalent of a 15 percent increase a year. A $100 billion additional tax would represent a 7 or 8 percent increase a year.

One odd point: The document written by Jaffee includes this line: "It will raise energy prices and impose annual costs on the order of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX."  
The Treasury Department redacted
the rest of the sentence with a thick black line.

The Freedom of Information Act, of course, contains no this-might-embarrass-the-president exemption (nor, for that matter, should federal agencies be in the business of possibly suppressing dissenting climate change voices).  

    You'd hope the presidential administration that boasts of being the "most open and transparent in history" would be more forthcoming than this."

    "Update 9/17/2009: I've written a followup article to respond to erroneous claims from the Center for American Progress."
    ============================= 

    For its CO2 endangerment finding the EPA relied on data at least 3 years out of date, failed to include latest research, including that global temperatures "have declined for 11 years:" (6/2009) 

    6/26/2009, "EPA May Have Suppressed Report Skeptical Of Global Warming," CBS News, Declan McCullagh 

    "The Environmental Protection Agency may have suppressed an internal report that was skeptical of claims about global warming, including whether carbon dioxide must be strictly regulated by the federal government, according to a series of newly disclosed e-mail messages.

    Less than two weeks before the agency formally submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House, an EPA center director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making hasty "decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data."

     
    The EPA official, Al McGartland, said in an e-mail message to a staff researcher on March 17: "The administrator and the administration has decided to move forward... and your comments do not help the legal or policy case for this decision."

     
    The e-mail correspondence raises questions about political interference in what was supposed to be a independent review process inside a federal agency -- and echoes criticisms of the EPA under the Bush administration, which was accused of suppressing a pro-climate change document.

    Alan Carlin, the primary author of the 98-page EPA report, told CBSNews.com in a telephone interview on Friday that his boss, McGartland, was being pressured himself. "It was his view that he either lost his job or he got me working on something else," Carlin said. "That was obviously coming from higher levels."

    E-mail messages released this week show that Carlin was ordered not to "have any direct communication" with anyone outside his small group at EPA on the topic of climate change, and was informed that his report would not be shared with the agency group working on the topic.

    "I was told for probably the first time in I don't know how many years exactly what I was to work on," said Carlin, a 38-year veteran of the EPA. "And it was not to work on climate change." One e-mail orders him to update a grants database instead.

    For its part, the EPA sent CBSNews.com an e-mailed statement saying: "Claims that this individual's opinions were not considered or studied are entirely false. This Administration and this EPA Administrator are fully committed to openness, transparency and science-based decision making. These principles were reflected throughout the development of the proposed endangerment finding, a process in which a broad array of voices were heard and an inter-agency review was conducted."

    Carlin has an undergraduate degree in physics from CalTech and a PhD in economics from MIT. His Web site lists papers about the environment and public policy dating back to 1964, spanning topics from pollution control to environmentally-responsible energy pricing.

    After reviewing the scientific literature that the EPA is relying on, Carlin said, he concluded that it was at least three years out of date and did not reflect the latest research. "My personal view is that there is not currently any reason to regulate (carbon dioxide)," he said. "There may be in the future. But global temperatures are roughly where they were in the mid-20th century. They're not going up, and if anything they're going down."

    Carlin's report listed a number of recent developments he said the EPA did not consider, including that global temperatures
    have declined for 11 years, that new research predicts Atlantic hurricanes will be unaffected; that there's "little evidence" that Greenland is shedding ice at expected levels; and that solar radiation has the largest single effect on the earth's temperature.

    If there is a need for the government to lower planetary temperatures, Carlin believes, other mechanisms would be cheaper and more effective than regulation of carbon dioxide. One paper he wrote says managing sea level rise or reducing solar radiation reaching the earth would be more cost-effective alternatives.

    The EPA's possible suppression of Carlin's report, which lists the EPA's John Davidson as a co-author, could endanger any carbon dioxide regulations if they are eventually challenged in court.

    "The big question is: there is this general rule that when an agency puts something out for public evidence and comment, it's supposed to have the evidence supporting it and the evidence the other way," said Sam Kazman, general counsel of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a non-partisan think tank in Washington, D.C. that has been skeptical of new laws or regulations relating to global warming.

    Kazman's group obtained the documents -- both CEI and Carlin say he was not the source -- and released the e-mails on Tuesday and the report on Friday. As a result of the disclosure, CEI has asked the EPA to re-open the comment period on the greenhouse gas regulatory proceeding, which ended on Tuesday.

    The EPA also said in its statement: "The individual in question is not a scientist and was not part of the working group dealing with this issue. Nevertheless the document he submitted was reviewed by his peers and agency scientists, and information from that report was submitted by his manager to those responsible for developing the proposed endangerment finding. In fact, some ideas from that document are included and addressed in the endangerment finding."

    That appears to conflict with an e-mail from McGartland in March, who said to Carlin, the report's primary author: "I decided not to forward your comments... I can see only one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office." He also wrote to Carlin: "Please do not have any direct communication with anyone outside of (our group) on endangerment. There should be no meetings, e-mails, written statements, phone calls, etc."

    One reason why the process might have been highly charged politically is the unusual speed of the regulatory process. Lisa Jackson, the new EPA administrator, had said that she wanted her agency to reach a decision about regulating carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act by April 2 -- the second anniversary of a related U.S. Supreme Court decision.

     
    "All this goes back to a decision at a higher level that this was very urgent to get out, if possible yesterday," Carlin said. "In the case of an ordinary regulation, these things normally take a year or two. In this case, it was a few weeks to get it out for public comment." (Carlin said that he and other EPA staff members asked to respond to a draft only had four and a half days to do so.)...

    The revelations could prove embarrassing to Jackson, the EPA administrator, who said in January: "I will ensure EPA's efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values: science-based policies and programs, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency.

    Similarly, Mr. Obama claimed that "the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over... To undermine scientific integrity is to undermine our democracy. It is contrary to our way of life.""...
     ========================

    Peer reviewed science says the 2009 EPA decision was erroneous. CO2 lags temperatures, it doesn't precede them. Thirty-year span, Jan. 1980-Dec. 2011:

    Jan. 2013, "The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature," Global and Planetary Change, Ole Humluma, b, Corresponding author contact information, E-mail the corresponding author,Kjell Stordahlc, Jan-Erik Solheimd














    "Fig. 1. Monthly global atmospheric CO2

    (NOOA; [NOAA] green), monthly global sea surface temperature (HadSST2; blue stippled) and monthly global surface air temperature (HadCRUT3; red), since January 1980. Last month shown is December 2011."

    "For the period January 1980 to December 2011...Ice cores show atmospheric CO2 variations to lag behind atmospheric temperature changes on a century to millennium scale....

    In our analysis we use eight well-known datasets:  
    1) globally averaged well-mixed marine boundary layer CO2 data,  2) HadCRUT3 surface air temperature data,  3) GISS surface air temperature data,  4) NCDC surface air temperature data, 5) HadSST2 sea surface data,  6) UAH lower troposphere temperature data series,  7) CDIAC data on release of anthropogene CO2, and  8) GWP data on volcanic eruptions. ...

    The maximum positive correlation between CO2 and temperature is found for
     
    CO2 lagging 

    11–12 months in relation to global sea surface temperature, 
    9.5–10 months to global surface air temperature, and 
    about 9 months to global lower troposphere temperature. 
     
    The correlation between changes in ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 is high, but do not explain all observed changes."

    ==============================

    US leads world in CO2 reduction:

    6/10/13, "US Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall as Global Emissions Rise," Cato.org, Paul C. 'Chip' Knappenberger
       
    "Notice that the U.S. is far and away the leader in reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, while China primarily is responsible for pushing global CO2 emissions higher. In fact, CO2 emissions growth in China more than offsets all the CO2 savings that we have achieved in the U.S."
     













     
    Chart from IEA report, p. 2 
     


    ==============================


    Comment: Why is this crime still going on? 

    Too big to fail, the US no longer has a two party system providing checks and balances, all the money in the world, and a way to finally silence the annoying American middle class.




    .

    No comments:

    Followers

    Blog Archive

    About Me

    My photo
    I'm the daughter of a World War II Air Force pilot and outdoorsman who settled in New Jersey.