EPA War on CO2 is Federal Insanity

Dear President Obama letter from 15 Governors-Excerpt

Republican Governors Oppose Fed’s
 Use of the EPA to Choke Off Capitalism

Are we looking at an example of cause and effect? We don’t need the scientific method to know that fear of global warming is a Left vs. right issue. Do we, however, just write off the relationship of party affiliation and political ideology as simply enigmatic, and fail to see the real causes underlying attacks on America from jihadists to climatists? A copy of the Sept. 9, 2014 letter excerpted above can be viewed HERE, e.g., as follows:

“Given your Administration’s opposition to make use of the Yucca Mountain repository, will you bring forward a viable, long-term solution for [nuclear waste] disposal that would win public support and the necessary votes in Congress? … If not, does your Administration expect the states with bans on new nuclear facilities [California, Connecticut, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, New Jersey, Oregon, West Virginia, and Wisconsin] to revise their laws, despite the federal government’s failure to adequately address the waste issue?” (See, ibid.)

The Left warned us that stress- and anxiety-caused mental illness and even cancer will be brought about by human CO2-caused higher ambient temperatures and catastrophic weather conditions. What we’re learning is that the Left already has gone insane just worrying about global warming. This is propaganda week in NY – for the latest, running of the libs – brought to you by the UN and sponsored by Western academia. “In the midst of the ‘mad crowd’ in New York City attending the People’s Climate March,” says Judith Curry, “sober people are trying to figure out ways to broaden the policy debate on climate change.” The sober-minded among us cannot ignore the fact that in attempting to avoid a hypothetical climate disaster the Left is actively engaged in bringing about economic disaster. The 15 Republican governors have some real issues with the EPA’s proposed Clean Power Plan, as follows:

Has the federal government conducted an analysis to determine the environmental impact of building renewable energy systems at the scale envisioned in the proposal? For example, one nuclear plant producing 1,800 MWs of electricity occupies about 1,100 acres, while wind turbines producing the same amount of electricity would require hundreds of thousands of acres. If such an analysis exists, please provide detailed information related to that analysis. If such an analysis does not exist, please explain why the analysis was not performed. (Ibid.)

The Left and the UN believed their computer-generated hockey stick – depicting the ominous blade of global warming spiking up from the long flat handle of a history of a supposedly stable prior global climate – was their silver bullet. In reality, academia has accomplished nothing more than the reinvention of the square wheel. The Earth’s prior history is a record of ups and downs–e.g.,

However, during the last 16-26 years since the alarm about human-CO2 was raised there has been no global warming, none whatsoever. “The whole concept behind IPCC,”  says Lennart Bengtsson, “is basically wrong.” Meanwhile, the Left is fighting what it feels is wrong with wrong-headed socio-economic policies, based on climate science that is demonstrably wrong, all while ignoring wrongs in the world that we could do something about if not driven over an economic cliff. The insanity of the Left’s plans have not gone unnoticed, as follows:

Given the amount of land required by renewable energy systems, has your Administration considered that federal land permitting requirements may preclude or stall the development of renewable projects? Also, expanding the deployment of wind and solar farms could readily conflict with the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Indeed, one can easily envision the plausible scenario whereby the ESA, operating as federal law separate from the CAA, could prevent state compliance with EPA’s emissions targets. How does your Administration propose to avoid these conflicts? (Ibid.)

The global warming debate is way past the use of the Left’s hockey stick by the US-hating UN-IPCC and the Eurocommies. It’s about the facilitators of the lie by entrenched bureaucracies: an entitled climate research establishment; government education and environmental lobbies; and, by Democrat politicians. Acting together these special interests and socio-political ideologues have done far more than radical Islam could ever do to subvert all of the lofty ideals of Americanism. “When it comes to the public’s right to demand answers of empire-building bureaucrats,” observed Roger Franklin (Quadrant), “we may have lost a little ground over the past century or so.” Has the Left truly given enough attention to the devastating consequences of the alternative they propose–e.g.,

Has the Administration mapped out a transition pathway for renewables from an artificial to a competitive market? Specifically, what is the federal plan to commercialize storage technology, which is necessary for that transition? (Ibid.)

What about the rest of the world? They understand the benefits of free enterprise even if they do not subscribe to the American ideal of the individual’s God-given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They see things their way and their plan is to use more energy to create more not less economic wealth–e.g.,

China may achieve its goal of reducing the carbon intensity of its economy (the ratio of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of output) by 45 percent below its 2005 level by 2020. But the country is growing so fast that its coal consumption and greenhouse gas emissions are expected to continue to increase. China is expected to add the equivalent of a new 500-megawatt coal-fired electric plant every 10 days for the next decade, according to projections by the United States government. ~Robert Stavins, ‘Climate Realities,’ NYT

 The EPA concedes that following the proposed rules would have no more than  a negligible effect at most on climate change and the amount of atmospheric CO2. But, the compliance costs and disruption to the economy could be huge. Will global warming continue to be a plank in the Democrat platform when it’s obvious AGW isn’t about CO2 and the climate but really about the Left’s belief capitalism is a disease?







About Wagathon

Hot World Syndrome—fear of a hotter, more intimidating world than it actually is prompting a desire for more protection than is warranted by any actual threat. https://twitter.com/Wagathon
This entry was posted in The Cultural Hegemony of Climate Superstition and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.