They are putting our energy, economy, jobs, living standards, health and welfare at grave risk
Guest post by Paul Driessen
Climate alarmists are meeting in Doha, Qatar, to hammer out a new international treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol that expires this year. The US Environmental Protection Agency is poised to unleash its first wave of carbon dioxide regulations. And Congress is teaming up with the White House to legislate taxes on hydrocarbon use and CO2 emissions, on top of pending tax hike on “the rich.”
This serious triple threat to our energy, economy, jobs, living standards, health and welfare is justified by assertions that the actions will stabilize Earth’s climate and prevent a litany of global warming horrors.
Our planet’s climate has never been stable, and never will be. There is no empirical evidence that carbon dioxide drives climate change, or that greenhouse gases have supplanted the complex and interrelated natural forces that have produced big and little ice ages, floods and droughts, stormy and quiescent periods throughout the ages.
Even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have risen from 280 parts per million before 1880 to 391 ppm (0.0391%) today, average global temperatures have flat-lined for 16 years;hurricane and tornado frequency and intensity have fallen to new lows; Antarctic sea ice continues to expand, while Arctic ice caps were reduced, not by warming, but by huge storms; and the rate of sea level rise remains steady.
While alarmists insist that Hurricane Sandy was “unprecedented” and proof that “climate change is real,” it is just one of many major storms that have battered New York and eastern Canada over the years.
Moreover, every ton of painful, economy-crippling US carbon dioxide reductions would be offset by 100 tons from India, China and elsewhere, and atmospheric CO2 concentrations would continue to climb.
But these inconvenient truths are irrelevant to climate campaigners, who are using “dangerous manmade climate change” as the best pretext ever devised to control energy use and economies. They simply hypothesize, model and assert that every observed weather and climate phenomenon is due to human CO2 emissions. Warmer or colder, wetter or drier, more ice or less, more storms, fewer storms, occasional big storms – if not now, someday, sooner or later. It’s exactly what climate alarmists predicted.
This is not science. It is political science, rooted in a loathing of hydrocarbons, economic growth and humanity. It’s ideological, religious – the only state-sanctioned, state-supported religion permitted today.
If Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex was bad, what are we to make of today’s political-scientific-university-bureaucratic-military-industrial-media-environmentalist complex? Funded and driven by tens of billions of dollars annually for research grants, renewable energy programs and regulatory regimes, it has far too much at stake to forsake adherence to Mann-made global warming cataclysm hypotheses.
According to Government Accountability Institute president Peter Schweizer, well-connected political cronies take hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for “green energy” and “global warming prevention” programs, funnel it to soon-to-be-bankrupt companies, keep a few million for themselves, and launder a few hundred thousand back to the politicians who brokered the deals. Obama campaign bundlers, says Schweizer, received more than $21,000 of corporate welfare for each dollar they donated to the Obama reelection campaign. Big Green environmentalist groups also garner countless millions in taxpayer lucre.
The consequences for average workers and families are dire. If even one of these swords of Damocles falls – Doha, EPA or the carbon tax – the effects will be disastrous. If all three are imposed (or all three in conjunction with tax hikes on job and wealth creators), the impacts will be utterly devastating.
Ignoring these facts, extensive other evidence for natural climate change, and the numerous scientists who reject their manmade climate catastrophe claims, advocates of a new Doha climate treaty, EPA “CO2 endangerment” rules, and “carbon taxes” insist these actions are needed to avoid ecological calamities.
They are adamant in contending that carbon taxes will somehow benefit the economy, create jobs and balance out-of-control spending. One is reminded of Will Rogers insightful quip: “Suppose you were an idiot – and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
Every one of these actions is intended to increase the cost of the hydrocarbon energy that powers our economy. But raising the cost of transportation fuels, electricity, lighting, heating, air conditioning, and thus of food, materials and equipment will severely impact the bottom line for factories, utilities, offices, farms, shops, airlines, shippers, hospitals, schools, churches, charities and government offices.
The poorest families may get rebates for their increased energy costs. These institutions will not. They will be forced to reduce wages and benefits, hire fewer full-time employees, lay people off, outsource operations to countries where energy costs are lower, or even close their doors.
Taxes paid by companies and employees will dwindle. Instead of paying taxes, newly jobless workers will collect unemployment and welfare – from shrinking government coffers. Charities will have much less money, even if deductions for donations remain in the tax code.
Unemployment will bring reduced nutrition, increased stress, and higher rates of heart attacks and strokes, spousal and child abuse, alcohol and drug abuse, suicide and premature death. The social, economic and healthcare costs will further “fundamentally transform” America, as President Obama is determined to do.
Even if Congress legislates carbon taxes, nothing suggests that Lisa Jackson will refrain from imposing EPA’s anti-hydrocarbon CO2 rules on top of them, or that the White House will reject any Doha treaty. There is no hint that the Interior Department will cease using the Endangered Species Act and other laws to shut down oil and gas drilling, while ignoring the ESA and growing slaughter of eagles and whooping cranes by wind turbines – or that the Energy and Defense Departments, EPA and Congress will stop spending more in borrowed funds to subsidize corn ethanol and Navy biofuel schemes.
These anti-hydrocarbon policies also mean the US Treasury will be deprived of hundreds of billions in lease bonuses, royalties, taxes and other revenues that it would realize from the development of our nation’s vast oil, natural gas and coal deposits. Instead, the United States will be forced to pay billions more for imported oil, often from dictatorial, unethical, environmentally reckless countries.
New hydrocarbon energy restrictions and green energy demands will deprive Third World families and communities of abundant, reliable, affordable energy, obstruct human rights progress, and keep entire nations impoverished. They will kill millions more from lung infections (from burning wood and dung), intestinal diseases (from contaminated water), malaria and other diseases of poverty and eco-imperialism.
Those countries will receive far less foreign aid from increasingly cash-strapped Western nations – and little of the Green Climate Fund cash that industrialized nations will supposedly transfer to kleptocratic ruling elites in poor countries, as reparations for supposedly causing climate change.
For every nation, this coerced energy and economic deprivation will make it increasingly difficult to adapt to future climate changes that nature will inevitably bring our way – in an era when mankind ought to have the wealth and technology to adapt far more easily than our ancestors were able to do.
The Climate Change Complex will do everything in its power to avoid discussing these issues, and vilify anyone who brings them up. However, we need to have this debate, and we need to have it now – in Doha, Congress, the courts and our state legislatures – before our fate is sealed for us.
__________
Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Perhaps this is why there is a media silence on Doha. For if people actually KNEW what these scoundrels were up to, there would be revolution. The media chooses silence, because even they cannot put a spin centrifugal enough to fling away the nasty bits. And it will be too late when the silent majority finds its voice.
This is a ‘perfect storm’ and not only a fitting end to an age of stagnation but the dawn of the new age of Western post-modern deconstructivism and methinks, not the best time to believe in re-incarnation.
I remember during the days of the cold war when per capita energy use was considered a vital statistical measure of the standard of living of a nation’s citizens. Nuclear power stations were seen as the key for a prosperous future and were under construction and being planned in considerable numbers.on both sides of the geopolitical divide.
If you apply heat from something like a heat gun to the surface of water you will find that NO heat passes into the water. The reason seems to be that the heat is blocked by surface tension. The blockage is total. I’m referring here to physical heat not radiated energy from the sun. Radiated energy passes through surface tension. Recall that surface tension can be demonstrated by placing a paper clip on the surface of water and observing that the surface tension supports the weight. Physical heat has no weight. Because of surface tension physical heat cannot pass from the atmosphere into the ocean. In other words there is no mechanism for storing heat on this planet. Because there is no mechanism for storing heat there can be NO AGW. This nonsense needs to stop and this FACT will stop it. The irony of the situation is that if you want to heat water from above using a heat gun you need to place a floating object on the surface to cancel the surface tension, then heat will pass. If you wish to disagree, feel free,but first try heating water from above.
Paul Driessen ” while Arctic ice caps were reduced, not by warming, but by huge storms”
That is really not accurate. What is affected by storms is the one day a year minimum that the bedwetters like to focus on. Storms have a short term effect and have exaggerated some years minima, which is why it is stupid and misleading to look at one day per year when we have detailed daily records going back decades.
When we take ALL the data into account and filter out short-term weather (eg 13 day filter) we see quite clearly what is happening.
http://i46.tinypic.com/r7uets.png
The warmer North Atlantic temperatures at the end of the century attributed to unusually strong El Nino events (note the red line is inverted) did indeed result in an increased rate of melting of Arctic ice. This much seems unsurprising.
What is more interesting is now that sea temperatures have stabilised, while remaining warmer, the rate of melting has returned to its earlier oscillatory behaviour and the big slide in Arctic ice area that got everyone justifiably concerned has ENDED.
Let’s say that again. The BIG MELT HAS ENDED.
Second conclusion is that far from seeing tipping points or run away warming this behaviour demonstrates a NEGATIVE FEEDBACK. On this evidence, more exposed water is providing extra cooling that counteracts the warmer water and stabilises the ice area.
Also if we use all the data, with weather removed, to detect the seasonal max and min points and look at how the length of the melting season changes over time, we find the following:
http://i45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.png
Melting season was longer than six months during the warm period but has recently swung downwards and is not shorter than six months. Again the steady melting pattern of the last 30 years is broken.
Oops, that last bit should have read: Melting season … “is NOW shorter than six months.. Again the steady melting pattern of the last 30 years is broken.”
For all it’s imperfections, the USA is a democracy and you’ll get exactly what you voted for. Time will tell if four more years makes people come to their senses.
Who is John Galt?
In the US, whether they knew it or not, people voted to have this done. I wasn’t one of those voters so ya’ll don’t come looking for me when you can’t pay your utilities and can’t afford the gas to get to your job, if you still have one.
A report in today’s Daily Telegraph (UK) states that the US treasury is worried about income. Without large tax hikes it will fall over the precipice.
One way to save money, without tax increases, is to abandon the ”green energy” policies which has cost the US $Bs of dollars without any chance of payback. There is no such thing as ”green energy”, unless you live in a cave using a wood fire for warmth and cooking. And even wood fires are not completely ”green” regardless of their CO2 production. The west’s political system is all well and good but when you vote in lawyers and economists as your representatives expect more laws and higher taxes and a drastic fall in living standards.
You voted them in, you can vote them out.
Stop blaming Obama.
McCain was greener than Obama in every way. McCain was ENDORSED by New Scientist.
Romney’s record as Mass gov was at least as green as Obama.
Bush happily signed more enviro laws than Obama. (so far!)
It’s not the Dems, its EVERY SINGLE BLOODY POLITICIAN EXCEPT JAMES INHOFE.
Hero Inhofe still stands alone with no help from either treasonous suicidal “party” in this utterly screwed former country.
And we have equally stupid politicians here in the UK, who are following similar paths. In fact the entire EU is going down the same road. But here things are even worse because 23 states are doing all this within a failing currency experiment centred on the Euro.
I’m running my car and bike on FULL RICH! Green-fascist legislation won’t impede my standards.
Humanity is doomed not because of the myth of MMGW/CC but because of the stupidity and/or power-seeking of the climate change tyrants. We live in dangerous times not because of MMGW/CC because climate ideology has unleashed Big Brother.
The Industrial Era has spawned industrialized people. Generations of paper shufflers, lawyers, lobbyists, advocates, United Nations, unions, etc. etc have corroded traditional values. Eventually something will break. Socialized schools now have to medicate the kids to control their sugar crazed mania. Take a look at the cesspools of Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago to see a sample of your socialized future. History says they will stop only when you stop feeding them.
Decadence destroyed the Romans; decadence is destroying us.
We are being failed by our free press. Rather than informing, they are cheer leading.
Ah dear here we go again.
It’s the energy restrictions that will destroy [x] [x] [x] tick whichever box I have set up for you but for god’s sake don’t think for yourself….
Here’s another good one.
“Does CO2 harm trees”. A wonderful question asked by the Heartland Survey on CO2 and Global Warming. Masters in disinformation and denialism for those who lived through the Acid Rain fiasco.
When did the US stop being a go ahead nation which took issues by the horns and worked to solve them? Rather than business as usual and damn the consequences? Ah sorry the US never led the world, that was the UK. Whilst the US has had many good ideas they have constantly been turned inwards rather than outwards to lead the world. My mistake.
Could the US lead the world in Green Energy and renewables? Certainly. Could it make a world market of it, making jobs and developing the technology around the world? Certainly. Will it? Not a chance, that’s not what the US does. So all these third world countries will be left buying coal from America and Australia to generate the energy they can afford. Instead of producing energy with their own natural resources and improving their OWN standard of living without having to get handouts from the “benign” western nations. Who keep them in grinding poverty, to drive their western energy business and throw them some scraps at the end of the feast….
The arrogance of the statement that “Those countries will receive far less foreign aid from increasingly cash-strapped Western nations” should beggar belief, but, sadly, does not. No word of making these nations energy independent. No word of utilising the abundant power sources in solar, geothermal or ocean. No word of the “benign” nations of the west developing the clean power technologies that will liberate the poort nations from power poverty. Dear me no, that would lift them up to the same level as the west. We couldn’t have that could we.
You have to have life to worry about standards of living and the changes in the climate that will happen, due to the increases of CO2 pollution, will deny all too many of those people life. So why worry about standards of living? Talk to the people of the Horn of Africa about standards of living. They’re starving and dying and living off charity as their land turns into a dust bowl 4 years out of 5.
However this article does make a diversion from the real topic. That of the combined Global SIA figures which peaked 3 weeks ago. At a second record low. Yes the chart that many WUWT believers point to as the “only chart that makes any sense”. Not performing as you wanted? Diddums. But, ignore it at your peril. The people are not stupid and will not believe “made up” for much longer. Reality is much stronger than massaged statistics and when the Arctic reaches virtual ice free in summer “the people” will know you do not tell the truth.
Then you will, eventually, be held to account for your words and actions.
I leave you with a famous quote.
“The Americans will always do the right thing… after they’ve exhausted all the alternatives.” — Winston Churchill
Today, the Financial Times revealed that David Cameron has blocked the appointment of David Kennedy, chief executive of the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), as the new permanent secretary of the department of energy and climate change.
The greens don`t seen pleased.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/nov/30/energy-climate-change-cameron-kennedy
There’s been very little media coverage on Doha here in Japan.
H.R. says:
December 3, 2012 at 2:20 am
In the US, whether they knew it or not, people voted to have this done. I wasn’t one of those voters so ya’ll don’t come looking for me when you can’t pay your utilities and can’t afford the gas to get to your job, if you still have one.
The last election was more a failure of the GOP than an endorsement of Obama. Romney was a flawed candidate in many ways, finding ways of alienating voters from every spectrum. I voted for him despite those flaws, primarily because I figured he might be able to hold the line against EPA regulations and money-hungry Big Green.
@Polistra, while much of the GOP got bit by the Greenie bug, particularly McCain (which is why I didn’t vote for him), I believe that is turning around now. Chin up.
The idea that Doha is a serious threat to anyone is laughable. For three years now, the same charade has taken place: third rate politicians and NGOs meet in some far flung country to … give the rest of the world some relief from their nonsense. And they were allowed to do so, so long as they didn’t make any progress to a replacement for the Kyoto commitment that ends on the 31st December.
Now as predicted: The talks are deadlocked. http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/climate-talks-deadlocked-doha-0
Why have so few sceptics noticed that it really is the end of this climate madness?
Robuk says: “Today, the Financial Times revealed that David Cameron has blocked the appointment of David Kennedy”
to paraphrase the article .. because we need green policies to “give people warm insulated houses … and, what was that thing we used to talk about? … oh yes gobal boring”.
Ummm… you may not have noticed that of Bush, McCain, Obama and Romney that only Obama is President? You may also not noticed the EPA is an executive branch agency, the head of the EPA is appointed by the President and serves at the pleasure of the President?
I’m not convinced that all of these things will come to pass as you predict. I don’t think any of these policies, if implemented, will be able to stay implemented for long. The economic costs would be too high and with the economy already on the brink of a recession further regulation might lead to counter measures and back lash against environmentalists.
I assume the more likely outcome to be increased electricity prices due to renewable energy based corporate welfare. We will continue to burn fossil fuels while wasting large sums of tax dollars installing massive wind and solar farms. Fossil fuels will continue to do all the heavy lifting but environmentalists will be pleased since the renewable energy giants who back them will be receiving large sums of corporate welfare. Electricity prices will rise slowly (and unnecessarily) pleasing all parties involved (except you know, the non-energy sector of the economy).
I don’t think environmental groups are dumb enough to kill the goose that lays their golden eggs…they need to keep it alive as long as possible and bleed us dry in the most profitable fashion. If all three of these groups succeed they’ll kill the goose, alert the populace and have the public poised to oppose any further environmental movement.
A point seldom discussed on this site is that public trust in science as a reliable enterprise is waning. If global warming is shown to be just about money and power public distrust in science will continue its unabated climb. This distrust can just as easily be wielded to allow formations of new power structures that are even more anti-science then the current. This will foster stronger distrust of older and effective solutions to problems. Anti-nuclear sentiments will be on the rise, all real environmental concerns thrown to the side, anti-vaccine movements will be able to point to the lies perpetrated by global warmistas, and every crackpot will find renewed faith in their anti-science.
No matter what we do we’re screwed.
Mike Bromley the Kurd says: Perhaps this is why there is a media silence on Doha.
Yes its rather disconcerting to find your own website (http://scef.org.uk) in the top ten for news on Kyoto.
However, the reason for this media silence is because the NGOs who make all the clamour have nothing to shout about and us sceptics are not giving an alternative story, so there is nothing to report.
Doha was the opportunity for us sceptics who feed the press full of alternative stories on Doha, and this is literally the first article that’s even partly covered this momentous event. In the sense that it’s the last climate talks before the Kyoto Commitment ends and even the lies of the Green NGOs about an extension to Kyoto** will be unable to hide its demise.
**It has been technically impossible to extend Kyoto since the 3rd October as this is the last date for amendments to take place before the 31st December when the Kyoto Commitment ends.