Democrats throw in the towel on climate bill

The Wall Street Journal

By IAN TALLEY

WASHINGTON — Key Senate Democrats Tuesday said it is unlikely there will be any more major committee action on climate-change legislation this year, the strongest indication yet that a comprehensive bill to cut greenhouse-gas emissions won’t be voted on until at least next year.

Although the Senate Environment Committee last week approved a version of the bill, the proposal will face strong revisions from moderate Democrats, particularly from senators on the Finance and Agriculture committees.

“It’s common understanding that climate-change legislation will not be brought up on the Senate floor and pass the Senate this year,” Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus said on the sidelines of a caucus lunch.

“I wouldn’t want to bet my paycheck that all the relevant committees will report out legislation by the end of this year,” said Sen. Thomas Carper (D., Del.).

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.), who is leading an effort by moderate, heartland Democrats to protect manufacturing and agriculture industries, said committees were no longer under any timetables to produce legislation.

Even Sen. John Kerry (D., Mass.), a climate-bill champion who last week said committees should have climate legislation processed by the end of the year, Tuesday backed off such expectations. “I don’t want to create artificial deadlines which get in the way of our being methodical about this,” he said.

Instead, Mr. Kerry said he is focused on getting the 60 votes necessary to pass controversial climate legislation — a higher margin than a simple majority and no mean feat. “The main thing to do here is to build the adequate base of support and consensus,” he said.

h/t to Dr. Benny Peiser

Advertisements

139 thoughts on “Democrats throw in the towel on climate bill

  1. Obama wanted Congressional action on the matter prior to the Copenhagen Conference to bolster his (and Holdren’s) position and intent to sign the treaty. What are the implications of this delay? Will the Copenhagen Treaty supersede any Congressional action. I recall the draft treaty has some language that binds a country with the signature of a head of state.

  2. and of course, next year is election year and with unemployment likely headed to 12% and the Republicans surging in the polls, there is no way that any of the moderate dems touch these. Even Harry Reid is way behind in his re-election race at this time.
    This will not even be voted on, much less passed, and the next Congress is going to be much more conservative than this one.
    The passage of Waxman-Markey in the House now looks like it is going to be the high-water mark of the warmist crusade – it looks to be all downhill from there for the movement. Let it stand as a monument to hubris for all time.
    There are a lot of fascinating domino’s that are going to fall as a result of this failure in the Senate:
    1) The Senate will not pass this bill – not this year, not next year, not ever.
    It would be political suicide, and they know it.
    2) cap and trade will thus never be implemented in the United States.
    3) Copenhagen, already set to fall apart, fades into insignificance as it becomes clear taht the US, India, and China all refuse to adopt any kind of mandatory limits on their economic outputs.
    4) Other, smaller countries such as Australia will abandon their efforts because it will be futile to restrict their economies when none of the largest economies are going to reciprocate. (It might take a little time, but this is inevitable.)
    5) some kind of voluntary agreements will be negotiated
    6) all voluntary agreements will fail to be implemented, because they will merely be political lip service to an idea whose time has passed. So pay no attention to them when they occur, they will all be nonsense.
    7) Eventually even scientists will give up the cause, as it become clear that there will be no great money or power flowing from supporting it.
    8) within a decade or two, Warmism will be looked at like Phrenology, as a great pseudo-scientific delusion that was overthrown by events.

  3. Shades of the completely unConstitutional Pelosi Saturday night health bill. Blitz your senators today, stop the Statue of Liberty play. Roll your eyes about that, Nancy.

  4. Hallelujah! Xmas comes early.
    This means there will not be a ‘climate bill’ in the next three years. Congress is NOT going to pass a bill this controversial in an election year (2010) where they may provide their opponents some ammunition to attack them with. The best chance for it was last year because people would tend to forget about it during the election cycle. Oh sure, They’ll talk a good game next session, but in the end, it will die again.
    By 2011 it will not be a priority for the Obama admin as it gears up for what will be a difficult re-election bid (it’s the economy, stupid, i.e. jobs, jobs, jobs) and I expect that the Republicans will gain enough in the House and Senate (usually the party in power loses 25 seats in the House and there are 19 Dem Senators up for reelection as opposed to 12 or so Republicans) to make it virtually impossible to pass the bill.

  5. Maybe they noticed the 10.2% unemployment. Of course that is a rational thought and maybe they are really just worried about their own jobs.

  6. Pieter F: The US Constitution holds that NO international treaty is valid unless it is approved by a 2/3 vote of the US Senate. The chief executive (President) does NOT have the constitutional right to bind the country to an action with his signature alone.
    Many people forget that the Clinton administration signed on to the Kyoto accords – but the US Senate rejected that treaty by a 95-0 vote. (Strange that so many blame Bush for that rejection, when it happened 2 years before he was even elected)
    Also, (and this comment isn’t very politically correct, but it is true) the US has a long history, especially in the 19th century, of signing dozens of treaties that looked good at the time and then just ripping them up and throwing them in the trash as soon as they don’t suit us anymore. That’s life in the real world. Enforcement of treaty obligations always comes down to, literally, “who’s gonna make me? You and what army?”

  7. @ Pieter F (07:38:35) :
    Obama wanted Congressional action on the matter prior to the Copenhagen Conference to bolster his (and Holdren’s) position and intent to sign the treaty. What are the implications of this delay? Will the Copenhagen Treaty supersede any Congressional action. I recall the draft treaty has some language that binds a country with the signature of a head of state.
    _____________________________
    For the US that text doesn’t matter and is not ‘legally binding’. Constitutionally no treaty is ‘signed’ until the Senate votes 2/3 to ratify. Purposely done that way to limit the power of the Chief Executive.

  8. Not surprising; the Senate isn’t going to make much progress on this until they’re done with health care, which itself may not be done this year.
    Pieter F: Pretty much everybody had already assumed Congress wouldn’t have anything passed before Copenhagen. It will make Copenhagen negotiations rather difficult, as everybody else in the world knows that Obama’s negotiators can’t promise that the US Senate will ratify any agreement. No, the treaty doesn’t supersede anything; the Senate will always have to ratify.

  9. I remember reading that Waxan-Markey passing the House, but not the Senate gives this administration some leverage in Copenhagen talks. How, I don’t know. Especially since Copenhagen seems to be falling apart before our very eyes.

  10. wws
    Good encapsulation which I truly hope materializes. I am hoping for swifter action however. One year ago I told my college classes that my prediction was that the climate change juggernaut would come crashing down around the warmist’s ear within about three years. Some of those students will still be in college by my deadline, so I am hoping this quite brush-under-the-rug by the Senate will actually be the clarion note of the death knell for this idiocy.

  11. Does this mean Senate Democrats don’t believe it is really a jobs bill or they just can’t sell it as a jobs bill?

  12. It seems weak that legislators who oppose a Climate Bill mostly do it on economic arguments, or to protect their constituencies. There is almost no open debate in the US Congress about the validity of the science behind the so-called consensus.
    As long as the AGW scientific foundation is not openly questionned and eventually discredited in political circles, attempts to legislate coercitive CO2 control measures and taxes will be repeated until a compromise is reached.
    Even a compromise would be very bad news if there is no man-made global warming.

  13. Copenhagen shmokenhagen. The movement is withering as loyalists make even bigger fools of themselves.
    However, the many causes which hitched their agenda to AGW will merely shift their advocacy to new lies and manipulation.
    That’s how they get funded.

  14. I hope that you are right and that this goes away but it seems to me that you guys are forgetting about Carol Browner and the EPA.

  15. Alittle O/T What most people don’t know ,or have forgot ,is most of these same congressman and women ,and our current leader Obama,were in congress under President Bush.They wan’t to blame the previous administraton for everthing yet these same democrats were in charge and have been since 2006 when dems took control of congress.

  16. Seems to me the EPA night take over where the senate is leaving off. Remember your not paranoid if everyone really is out to get you

  17. wws (07:45:05) :
    8) within a decade or two, Warmism will be looked at like Phrenology, as a great pseudo-scientific delusion that was overthrown by events.
    Yeah, they’re kind of lowbrow.

  18. “Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.), who is leading an effort by moderate, heartland Democrats to protect manufacturing and agriculture industries, said committees were no longer under any timetables to produce legislation.”
    Having in-laws in Michigan-the place is completely fallen apart. You want to really kill what’s left of auto industry? go ahead light that Hemp wicked petard…
    Oregon’s not much better and the Blue Islanders have not a clue.We in the Red Sea
    of Oregon do.BTW I haven’t seen any birds at my feeders for two weeks.Bit unusual.

  19. Not totally out of the woods, right? can’t the EPA still push something similar through based on their “endangerment” finding?

  20. This is a good news, bad news news. The good news is that the federal legislative branch won’t pass a climate bill this year. The bad news is that the EPA will regulate CO2 by declaring it a dangerous gas. Why are the EPA bureaucrats able to exercise such powers over the citizens of the US? Under the Constitution that responsibility belongs to Congress.

  21. Can’t wait to see some of the hand-wringing.
    And on a related note, Al Gore’s Current TV is laying off 80 employees. I feel bad for the employees, but wonder how much longer CTV can survive. I also give Gore credit for trying something different. That said, is it wrong for me to want to see him fail?

  22. I didn’t think they could push it through, even so, I’m sighing a great sigh of relief. The longer the legislation stays in congress, the longer we have to get real science back into the debate. Perhaps sanity will win the day after all. I can’t help but think this web site, along with a few others have contributed greatly to the delays in this legislation. Thanks guys, keep up the good work and keep fighting the good fight!!!!

  23. The Clinton Administration never submitted the Kyoto Protocol for senatorial ratification. The senate had previously passed a resolution 95-0 that pre-empted the Kyoto Treaty.

  24. Small comfort, that events conspire to unravel Congressional mischief–we’ve still Dear Leader’s executive powers to contend with until they’re bound under myriad indictments.

  25. Don’t trust or believe a word of it. This may be just a trick to rile up some public indignation by the greens. A few acts of “civil dissobediance” with a complicit press, some horrid images of drowning polar bears and Maldivian diving politicians, etc., and then in the dark of night a vote will be held a few days before the Copenhagen signing ceremony. President Obama will attend and sign both the law and the accord.
    I think this is a likely scenario, but I hope it doesn’t come to pass

  26. Can we now ask the Goracle to follow Sentator Chuck Grassley’s recent advice:
    “Apologize to the American People and COMMIT SUICIDE!”?

  27. The U.S. Senate killed off Kyoto by insisting that, among other things, all nations must be subject to the same rules, and that any such agreement would not cause serious economic harm to the U.S.:

    (1) the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol to, or other agreement regarding, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992, at negotiations in Kyoto in December 1997, or thereafter, which would–
    (A) mandate new commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the Annex I Parties, unless the protocol or other agreement also mandates new specific scheduled commitments to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions for Developing Country Parties within the same compliance period, or
    (B) would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States; and
    (2) any such protocol or other agreement which would require the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification should be accompanied by a detailed explanation of any legislation or regulatory actions that may be required to implement the protocol or other agreement and should also be accompanied by an analysis of the detailed financial costs and other impacts on the economy of the United States which would be incurred by the implementation of the protocol or other agreement.

    [the Resolution was passed, 95 – 0.]

  28. Well all that legalese is fine and dandy. The US Constitution also says that the Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare OF THE UNITED STATES.
    So nowhere are they authorised to collect taxes for anything else; like medical insurance, or carbon restrictions.
    And please note that wording about the “general welfare of the United States.” That means that political entity that is headquartered in Washington DC. Is says nothing about providing for the general welfare of every tom, dick and harry. Yet the socialists try to claim that they have authority to rob Peter to pay Paul.
    And note that when they do, they cite not the Constitution of The United States; but instead they cite the preamble to that document; where the words “of the United States” do not appear, and also provide for is replaced by “promote”.
    But when has Congress ever paid ANY attention to that Constitution, where in article 9 of the Bill of rights it plainly says that the PEOPLE retain ALL of the rights that they haven’t ceded to the United States (the feds) in THE Constitution.
    So if there is no mention of it in the Constitution; it’s for sure you have retained that right .
    The other clause that the socialists like to drag out is the final clause of Article I, Section 8, which defines the powers assigned to the Congress. That final clause says that they have the power to make all laws that are “necessarty and appropriate” to carry out the mandates of the previous 17 or 18 clauses.
    But then what Congressperson understands that ” (A )is NECESSARY for (B) if and only if , in the absence of (A), (B) is impossible, no matter what. ”
    So any problem that can be resolved by law, in two or more different ways, is not in the bailiwik of the Congress, since none of those solutions is “necessary”; given that there are other ways to solve it. So in that case the Sovereign States can each do it their own way.
    But Congress universally uses that clause to argue that they can write any laws they feel like (related to carrying out those few mandates). They can’t , unless there is no other way to perform that function.
    But they do it anyway.
    And if you ever wondered why Congress loves deficit spending, and will never stop doing it; well the answer is in the first clause of Article 1 Section 8; they have the authority to lay and collect taxes to pay for the debts of The United States; so they can fund all their unConstitutional socialist programs with deficit spending, and transfer the problem to the National Debt. But you don’t see a lot of action going on, in paying down that national debt, which they are authorised to tax us to do.
    The whole bunch are run amok hoodlums; well IMHO.
    And I don’t believe that the US Supreme Court has ever cited the preamble to the US Constitution as its governing authority on any ruling they have ever issued; the first words of the US Constitution are :- “Article I Section 1 ”
    Anything before that is just the library card that says what this document is about.

  29. A little pragmatism or realism from the Democrats, well I never!
    Can the USA now run the Copenhagen truck off the road? – Surely Obama will not attend the UN jamboree in Denmark?
    We, the British proletariat have still to convince our dimwitted politicians, that the flawed hypothesis of AGW is holed below the waterline, not forgetting the gullible EU commission – who are more pro AGW than even the British! – and that is saying something.

  30. They are brilliant. This bill only has a chance being voted on in hot weather. If we can get some sizzling hot temps next summer, they may build up some steam and get it railroaded thru. Buffet just bought the BNSF railroad, so it seems he is bullish on the lucrative coal business.

  31. What is that deficit figure again? The political advantage remains for a hidden tax on energy, compared to increased income- or sales-taxes.
    The science has been an amusing sideshow. It might linger as “precautionary principle”, but “energy security” is my candidate for renewed emphasis.

  32. Seems Barry & Nancy are too busy helping sick Americans to help save the planet.
    One must have priorities after all.

  33. wws (07:52:32) : & 01wmarsh (07:54:18) : I tried not to be too obvious in my underlying point to see if there was a reaction. Thank you for revealing an important element that may become an internationally contentious matter.
    Constitutionally, the Senate must ratify a treaty with a super majority. Everyone knows (or should know) that. Yet if the treaty retains the binding language and Obama signs it as he has promised to do so, it will further erode Obama’s support at home while giving the far left, redistribution, one-government types at the UN and in the Third World ammunition to further criticize the US. It’s a set up.

  34. I remember that the legal precedent has been set, that the US President can cancel a treaty that the Senate has approved with the stroke of a pen. It was a treaty with Formosa (aka Taiwan). I think it was Carter, and some Senator sued, and the Supreme Court handed down the decision.
    The EPA can cause much mischief, but it is a creature of Congress, it will become an election issue, and the House could simply refuse to budget the EPA at anything like “normal” levels.
    Me, I want to push back hard, on several levels. Including impeaching the Kelo majority, not just for Kelo, but that’s the easiest one to cite.

  35. Mother Earth is going to protest about her inhabitants purile attempts to place controls on her future climate in December by throwing a climatic tantrum this NH winter 🙂

  36. Crossing my fingers behind my back, this is great news. Now if we in California could somehow get rid of the children running Sacramento and shut down the economy-killing legislation that is AB-32. Unfortunately, when you believe that shutting down anything that produces carbon will bring back the unicorns and fairies (is that politically incorrect?), you’re beyond hope.

  37. On September 30, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a proposal describing how it
    intends to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act’s (CAA) Title V and
    Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting programs. EPA’s proposal, if adopted, would
    establish specially tailored emission thresholds for the application of the Title V and PSD programs to
    sources that emit GHGs. EPA estimates that the proposed thresholds would apply to sources with nearly
    70% of the national GHG emissions from stationary sources and result in GHG-related permit
    requirements for approximately 14,000 facilities, including approximately 3,000 sources that previously
    have not been subject to the Title V program.
    Glen Blackburn (08:18:24) :
    Seems to me the EPA night take over where the senate is leaving off.
    Remember your not paranoid if everyone really is out to get you

  38. Pieter F (07:38:35) : “Obama wanted Congressional action on the matter prior to the Copenhagen Conference to bolster his (and Holdren’s) position and intent to sign the treaty. What are the implications of this delay? Will the Copenhagen Treaty supersede any Congressional action(?) I recall the draft treaty has some language that binds a country with the signature of a head of state.”
    The multi-alternative draft document is:
    un-fccc-copenhagen-2009
    Pieter, I didn’t find that particular language, but they may have made it difficult to search for. The words signature and endorse are not in the document, as near as I could tell. Please keep looking. I did find this:
    “[…Provision of capacity-building support to developing country Parties, along with delivery of financial support and technology transfer, shall be a legally binding obligation of developed country Parties, with consequences for non-compliance.]
    (“Ve vill haff our methods to ensure kompliance…”)
    Note, too, that developing countries’ participation is voluntary and not binding, even after signature.

  39. Seems OT, but it’s not.
    Authors Brenda and Robert Vale have found that a midsize dog is worse for Earth climate than a Toyota Landcruiser and recommend that dog-owners shoud at least get rid of their second family car.
    How about people buying a big SUV to move their big dog(s)? They are climate killers par excellence.
    And great to know that in Sweden the climate “foodprint” (my copyright, I hope) was invented. Means that food cans or boxes now show how climate-friendly the content is.
    How about dog food in that context?

  40. “Remember you are not paranoid if everyone really is out to get you”
    “Beware the miscreants in the dark of the night.”
    EPA indicates that it believes that although the majority of facilities that would be subject to this rule are
    electric generating units and industrial facilities that already have Title V Operating Permits, additional
    facilities—including landfills and large commercial facilities such as large hospitals—would become
    subject to the Title V and PSD programs for the first time.
    Background to the Rule Proposal
    Since 1993 through the CAA’s Acid Rain program and more recently through the Mandatory Reporting
    of Greenhouse Gases Rule,1 EPA requires certain facilities to monitor and report emissions of carbon
    dioxide (CO2) and other GHGs, but has not established emission limits for GHGs. In April 2009,
    however, EPA issued a proposed finding that six GHGs endanger human health and welfare by
    contributing to global climate change and therefore should be regulated as air contaminants
    under the
    CAA. The six GHGs that are the subject of this proposed endangerment finding, as well as this rule
    proposal under the Title V and PSD programs, are
    CO2,
    methane,
    nitrous oxide,
    hydrofluorocarbons,
    perfluorocarbons, and
    sulfur hexafluoride.

  41. wws (07:45:05) , This is a best case scenario , and one that I hope for . However , I’m afraid that congress is so determined to pass this that they don’t care about the consequences , politically speaking . They apparently feel that the money machine and the media will save their bacon next fall . Of course they do this at their own risk , and right now , the polls are against them . Then again we have the EPA’s endangerment finding , which hopefully will get bogged down with lawsuits . The best we can hope for is enough time to get more and better science out there for the public , as the pols obviously don’t give a flying fig about science , and the greenies in the administration would just as soon repress it .

  42. Now is not the time to celebrate or become complacent. These economy-killing bills are like zombies. They just won’t die.

  43. I just read the news here. On its face: great news! (Sigh)
    I have the sense that we just stepped back from the edge of the abyss. The abyss is still there, mind you, but we’re not about to jump (or be pushed).
    I fear(ed) the tinderbox that these kooks were creating. I also can’t count all the thoughts I’ve self-edited so as not to be snipped.
    Anthony…do not relent. I believe some of this is attributable to you.

  44. Let’s not forget that the EPA is on a mission to regulate CO2 even if Congress doesn’t have the will to do so. The U.S. Supreme Court in a ruling last year found that the EPA does have the authority to regulate CO2 as a pollutant under existing law. The EPA has already closed the comment period for their authority to issue regulations and are currently fast tracking the process for finalization. While the Obama administration made a half hearted suggestion that they would prefer climate legislation from congress the absence of such will not prevent the EPA from issuing regulations requiring the reduction in CO2 emissions. What they can’t do is institute a cap and trade scheme since that is something entirely new to existing environmental law.
    And remember under the Air Quality legislation their is no limitation on lack of available technology to do so. If there is no way to control CO2 emissions with technology, the EPA can require a complete shut down to achieve the desired results.
    We are not done with this issue by a long shot. Senators may be less willing to commit political suicide (especially when few have safe seats because they must stand before their entire state voters not just the ones they select as in the House), however this administration is as reckless as ever with our economic future.

  45. It just takes a leap of faith to declare the EPA as having been infiltrated by terrorists and all bets are off. You have to rip the thing apart and reconstruct it. All bogus funding vanishes. All supporters are questioned about their motives etc. etc.
    A lot of ‘Sh–/stuff’ (pc compliant) is going to hit the fan real soon and maybe McCarthyism will be reborn in a good way.
    Just my 10 cent’s worth. Except I’m a Brit so it’s 10p.
    Get on with it you Yanks. Save us from this green nightmare! We have no hope. All of our government’s are sucking on the commie tit.

  46. The problem I see is what ISN’T happening: Few if any congressmen are saying: “Absolutely NO- because AGW is a fantasy. ” The way to beat this thing is to start calling it what it is:
    A (take your pick) SCAM/HOAX/FANTASY/PSYCHOSIS/RELIGIOUS CULT

  47. Whether or not various Senate committees have dropped further activities on global warming legislation, the EPA is pushing its CO2 endangerment declaration like there is no tomorrow. AGWers have a multi-pronged attack under way. Don’t believe anything they say,

  48. co2–that’s you and your kids, your job and your transportation
    methane–that’s your diet if it includes beef, milk, cheese, sour cream, etc.
    nitrous oxide–that’s internal combustion engines, but it is an extremely important agricultural fertilizer, so that is food production they are going after
    It is also a very effective food preservative.
    Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic, colorless, odorless, non-toxic and non-flammable gas (under standard conditions). Of the 8,000 tons of SF6 produced per year, most (6,000 tons) is used as a gaseous dielectric medium in the electrical industry. SF6 is used in the electrical industry as a gaseous dielectric medium for high-voltage (35 kV and above) circuit breakers, switchgear, and other electrical equipment, often replacing oil filled circuit breakers (OCBs) Wik
    hydrofluorocarbons,
    perfluorocarbons–help me out here, I think this is all refrigeration. What would life be without the ol’ ‘fridge?

  49. Yes, but the EPA can be sued almost indefinitely. If the past is any indication, it would take 10 years to implement any plan by the EPA.

  50. Timetables or no timetable, Debbie Stabenow is not to be trusted. She is a nut who lives in some alternate universe and claims she can feel global warming when flying.
    “Climate change is very real,” Stabenow confessed as she embraced cap and trade’s massive tax increase on Michigan industry – at the same time claiming, against all the evidence, that it would not lead to an increase in manufacturing costs or energy prices. “Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I’m flying. The storms are more volatile. We are paying the price in more hurricanes and tornadoes.”

  51. Now pay attention! What about this:
    The study also recommends a cut in consumption of low nutritional value foods such as alcohol, chocolate and sweets, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions caused by their production

  52. This will probably mean that our Europe will have to go its own lonely way and will jump into a socialist/ecofascist continent with a decreasing and weakening economy comparable with the situation in the former East-block.

  53. Oh well, now it is up to Australia and the lawyer in charge of our climate to lead the world and stand proudly on the headland of the high moral ground at Copenhagen. If only Turnbull didn’t represent the archetype climate change alarmist demographic he might be able to show some independent thinking and true leadership.
    Regards
    Michael

  54. “Climate change is very real,” Stabenow confessed as she embraced cap and trade’s massive tax increase on Michigan industry – at the same time claiming, against all the evidence, that it would not lead to an increase in manufacturing costs or energy prices. “Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I’m flying. The storms are more volatile. We are paying the price in more hurricanes and tornadoes.”
    That is what I call damaged thinking. It’s normal to want to see things you are looking for, but there is a limit wherein one steps back and asks: “Is this really happening?”. Isolation, extreme religious dogma and drugs are forces that can lead to an alternate reality. We did not inherit such wild imaginations, but they can be induced. We did not evolve to be in a plane at 30,000′ trying to feel the warming a cause insists must be a real & present danger.
    The remedy for such a bent is simple: Go out into the Michigan countryside and try to eke out sustenance from the frozen ground. Hunger will erase the feelings at 30,000′. The thinking after that will be like the weary traveller having crossed the desert and finding the warmth of civilization…
    and refuge.
    You don’t know how good you got it until one day it’s gone.
    Hundreds of millions of Americans are finding that out.
    Some of our politicians need help in coming back down to Earth from the mirage of 30,000′. Some of them cannot be reached.

  55. The EPA has the ability to do a lot of damage in the short term – but their greatest weakness is that they only have the ability to issue economically destructive edicts. Meaning that they have the ability to restrict emissions and force expensive control technology, which will increase the cost greatly, but they do not have the power to authorize any affordable substitutes.
    Only an ideologue could fail to see the absolute disaster this approach would be in practice. Can you imagine the outrage when, in a nation already at 10% unemployment levels and rising, the bureaucracy begins mandating job losses in heavy industry? And higher power costs in hard hit midwestern areas? If they tried this, it would result in the greatest political backlash in US political history and Carol Browner’s political head would be served up on a platter.
    As would any political party that continued to support her!

  56. It’s interesting to note that the Kyoto resolution passed by the Clinton Congress, was on a 95 to 0 vote.
    Recall the 95 Theses of Martin Luther, nailed to the church door?
    Today the proponents of climate change throw in the towel and perhaps, possibly, learn a lesson in humility?? It is a different world now. Knowledge is flowing through crumbling walls of ignorance. Those seeking to browbeat the once-ignorant, find it a frustrating task.
    Men. Good men. Men of integrity; will not allow their families and children to be bullied by the machinations of propaganda. If those machinations are fueled by lies, distortions, untruths – they will fail. Machines need fuel. The fuel of distortion and untruth, has just about run out.

  57. Well, slightly OT but not really. I just returned from the chemical engineers’ conference (annual meeting) in Nashville TN, where I gave a condensed version of my speech on California’s climate change law – AB 32. I finally ran into quite a number of chemical engineers who are devout believers that Carbon Is Gonna Kill Us All. Their questions after my speech were quite “vigorous.” I noted that none of them appeared to be older than 30. However, those in the older group were quite supportive.
    After the speech, I related the facts that attempting to regulate the globe’s average temperature by adjusting the CO2 content of the atmosphere violates the fundamentals of process control, and that started quite a discussion. Some of those in attendance are in government positions, and had never heard the process control argument before. It is likely (at least this is my hope) that the seeds of doubt were planted.
    For more on this process control issue, see:
    http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/chemical-engineer-takes-on-global.html

  58. I still think the way through is to insist that the EPA follow the Clean Air Act to the letter. Don’t allow the adjusted allowable levels of CO2. Stick to the letter of the Act. Might be the needed wake-up call.

  59. wws (13:18:28) and Pragmatic (13:23:02) :
    Agreed on all counts. I wrote on this back in May 2009, to quote a portion:
    “Despite rosy projections by some, including California’s Air Resources Board, that jobs will be created by panic-motivated CO2 and other greenhouse gas regulations, the reality is that jobs will be lost, not created. The economic models that were used to evaluate California’s AB 32 were seriously flawed, as several independent expert reviewers found and reported to ARB.” [but were then ignored by ARB.]
    http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/politicians-beware-of-backlash-from-co2.html

  60. Obama Considers Attending Copenhagen After All
    US President Barack Obama has said in an interview that he may reconsider his decision not to attend the global climate summit in Copenhagen in December. President Obama is again considering whether to come to Copenhagen in December for the United Nations Climate Summit (COP15) — if there is an indication that his presence would make a difference.
    The COP15 meeting takes place between Dec. 7 and Dec 18. Obama plans to be in the Norwegian capital Oslo on December 10 to receive his Nobel Peace Prize and could hop down to Copenhagen afterwards.
    “And if I am confident that all the countries involved are bargaining in good faith and we are on the brink of a meaningful agreement and my presence in Copenhagen will make a difference in tipping us over the edge, then certainly that’s something that I would do. But I’ve got to make sure that, over the next three weeks, pressure is continually applied on our teams and everybody else’s teams to actually create a framework that people can sign off on,” Obama says in an interview with Reuters.
    Asked if there was more he could bring to Copenhagen — apart from what is currently being discussed in Washington — Obama was clear that legislation on climate change would not be ready by then.
    “I think everybody understands that the Senate won’t have acted on climate change legislation before Copenhagen. And our key partners, including Prime Minister Rasmussen of Denmark, the host, who’s taken a very constructive and active role on this issue, I think recognizes that not every “t” is going to be crossed and “i” dotted in the next three weeks. I think the question is (whether) we can create a set of principles, building blocks, that allow for ongoing and continuing progress on the issue, and that’s something I’m confident we can achieve,” Obama says.
    “And I’m confident that the American people will recognize the enormous opportunity around a clean energy economy and the ability for us to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions,” he adds.
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,660386,00.html

  61. ALL together now
    ………………….
    Copenhagen will fail…
    ………………….
    Cap and Trade will fail…
    ………………….
    Health Care reform (as proposed by the Demo’s) will fail…
    ………………….
    The Demo’s will loos 19+ seats in the senate…
    ………………….
    Sanity will be restored in congress…
    ………………….
    The science will be rehashed and be (dis)proved…
    ………………….
    ………………….
    Copenhagen will fail…
    ………………….
    Cap and Trade will fail…
    ………………….
    Health Care reform (as proposed by the Demo’s) will fail…
    ………………….
    The Demo’s will loos 19+ seats in the senate…
    ………………….
    Sanity will be restored in congress…
    ………………….
    The science will be rehashed and be (dis)proved…
    ………………….
    ………………….
    Copenhagen will fail…
    ………………….
    Cap and Trade will fail…
    ………………….
    Health Care reform (as proposed by the Demo’s) will fail…
    ………………….
    The Demo’s will loos 19+ seats in the senate…
    ………………….
    Sanity will be restored in congress…
    ………………….
    The science will be rehashed and be (dis)proved…
    ………………….
    ………………….
    Copenhagen will fail…
    ………………….
    Cap and Trade will fail…
    ………………….
    Health Care reform (as proposed by the Demo’s) will fail…
    ………………….
    The Demo’s will loos 19+ seats in the senate…
    ………………….
    Sanity will be restored in congress…
    ………………….
    The science will be rehashed and be (dis)proved…
    ………………….
    ………………….

  62. A few weeks ago , Steve Forbes and someone from AEP ( I think ) were on Huckabee discussing Cap and Trade . The guy from AEP said that the only reason that he supported C&T was that it would be a better alternative to whatever the EPA might dish out . BTW , John Christy was on the same show and he is not particularily ruddy faced . That’s a bad picture on the other thread .

  63. 13 years of SOHO Solar images in the EUV:
    http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/EITNov1996_Nov2009.JPG
    In perspective of the previous cycle, SC24 looks rather pale.
    This should come as a cold reminder that in the real world, things do not pan out according to the best laid theories…or agendas.
    While the flux is rising, the spots are lagging/wisping out, under the hood there are some things going on that have not been seen before. Of course, we never had the ability to look under the hood before.
    The Prime Warmer of the Earth is having it’s own tussle.

  64. COPENHAGEN UPDATE
    Barack Obama says he will go to Copenhagen climate change conference
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6534626/Barack-Obama-says-he-will-go-to-Copenhagen-climate-change-conference.html
    President Barack Obama has said he will go to Copenhagen next month to secure an international deal on climate change.
    President Obama acknowledged that the US Senate would not pass the crucial legislation before Copenhagen.
    A key global treaty to stop global warming almost collapsed last week after poorer nations threatened to walk out unless rich countries like America agree to cut their emissions. However, President Obama said he thinks a deal can still be done and he will go to Denmark in mid-December to make sure it happens.
    “If I am confident that all of the countries involved are bargaining in good faith and we are on the brink of a meaningful agreement and my presence in Copenhagen will make a difference in tipping us over edge then certainly that’s something that I will do,” he told Reuters.
    The UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen has been billed as the world’s last chance to stop temperature rise going above 2ºC (3.6ºF).
    The latest round of UN talks in Barcelona last week ended in deadlock, after the US and other rich countries refused to cut their greenhouse gas emissions in line with the poor world’s demands.
    It is difficult for the US to sign up to legally-binding emission targets until the level of cuts have been approved by the Senate. President Obama acknowledged that the US Senate would not pass the crucial legislation before Copenhagen. But he said a “framework” agreement can still be thrashed out that commits the world to tackling global warming.
    “I think the question is can we create a set of principles, building blocks, that allow for ongoing and continuing progress on the issue and that’s something I’m confident we can achieve,” he said.
    The President’s intervention will come as a relief to environment groups who want America to lead the world on climate change – although they will be campaigning hard to ensure President Obama signs up to a tough enough target eventually.
    It is now thought the Copenhagen meeting will become a “leader’s summit” where the world will make a “political agreement” on cutting emissions before thrashing out targets and a legal treaty later in the year.
    Talks between the US and Chinese leaders during an Asia tour later this month will be crucial in agreeing carbon emission targets and the amount of money developed countries are willing to pay the poor world to help them cut emissions.
    President Obama said the large polluting nations can thrash out a deal.
    “The key now is for the United States and China, the two largest emitters in the world, is to be able to come up with a framework that, along with other big emitters like the Europeans and those countries that are projected to be large emitters in the future, like India, can all buy into,” he said.
    ….Hey, and guess what… Gordon Brown has also changed his mind and is going too!

  65. Robert E. Phelan (11:19:39) :
    “Now is not the time to celebrate or become complacent. These economy-killing bills are like zombies. They just won’t die. ”
    Correct. We will have to wrestle this pig again.

  66. Cap & Trade better than EPA? I doubt seriously that a 50%+ surcharge on everything would be better than a 50%+ tax on all industry.
    It matters not whether your car hits a 6′ through oak tree or a brick wall at 65mph.
    The vehicle and passenger are both going to get totaled.

  67. JT (13:03:19) :
    Just saying it again,
    Who needs Copenhagen when you have the EPA….
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/09/epa-sends-co2-endangerment-finding-to-the-white-house/
    Worth re-reading
    There are also ANSI and ISO standards that are contractually imposed, including most govt contracts, that totally bypass any national laws. See: http://www.asq.org/quality-press/display-item/index.pl?item=T845E . There’s more than one way to skin a cat.

  68. They won’t give up.
    If the the Copenhagen fails to deliver the legal basis for their power grab (because that’s where this is all about) they will try to accomplish their objectives via other treaty. Think about an international treaty to control the banks, the economy and trade agreements.
    Don’t forget that Obama is in the process of signing on to a whole series of UN Treaties that former Presidents have kept in the drawer.
    Be vigilant to follow the entire political process and don’t focus on climate issues alone.
    What still stands is the UN IPCC 2007 report which is full of debunked conclusions, but States and Cities still use this paper to justify many Carbon Emission Reduction schemes that are undertaken independently from Copenhagen or Federal Government.
    And there is still the big axe swung in the air by EPA which has the authority, execution and control capabilities to enforce emission reduction schemes without the consent of the US Congress and the Senate.
    There are and will be individual countries who will follow an individual course on emission reductions.
    They will try to pressure other countries with import restrictions or taxes.
    Also think about UN Agenda 21, another horrible treaty.
    We are not out of the woods yet and there is still a lot going on, behind closed doors.
    No reason for any celebration at this moment in time.

  69. Zeke the Sneak (12:38:40) :
    [The UN study] …

    Not UN. The Food Climate Research Network another UK Gov. funded fake campaign group (see our favourite – The Carbon Trust). Loyal party supporters are given a “nice little earner” turning out pseudo-scientific “reports” supporting policy which the media then pass off as real science.
    The paragraph … It [the report] has been prompted by growing concern about the impact of food production and consumption on the changing global climate. … has become a trademark. “Follow the (taxpayer) money” as they say.

  70. Inre, “they won’t give up”; “there’s more than one way to skin a cat,” etc.
    W.H. Tells Hill Policy ‘Czars’ Won’t Testify
    Friday, October 23, 2009 8:10 AM
    By: Stephen Dinan, The Washington Times Article
    The White House has told Congress it will reject calls for many of President Obama’s policy czars to testify before Congress — a decision senators said goes against the president’s promises of transparency and openness and treads on Congress’ constitutional mandate to investigate the administration’s actions.
    Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican, said White House counsel Greg Craig told her in a meeting Wednesday that they will not make available any of the czars who work in the White House and don’t have to go through Senate confirmation. She said he was “murky” on whether other czars outside of the White House would be allowed to come before Congress.
    Miss Collins said that doesn’t make sense when some of those czars are actually making policy or negotiating on behalf of Mr. Obama.
    “I think Congress should be able to call the president’s climate czar, Carol Browner, the energy and environment czar, to ask her about the negotiations she conducted with the automobile industry that led to very significant policy changes with regard to emissions standards,” Miss Collins said at a hearing Thursday that examined the proliferation of czars.

  71. No, we’re not home safe yet. But Harry Reid has one heck of a stinker bill (in Lindsay Grahams words) in Health Care by the House, and with the President urging him on, his hands are quite full. The Channel is backed up.
    For now.

  72. “When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer “Present” or “Not Guilty.””
    -Theodore Roosevelt-

  73. wws (07:45:05) :
    I’d like to believe you’re right, that would be the rational course. But when you have leaders like Pelosi who say it’s “Fair” to throw people in jail for failing to buy government health insurance, how rational are they?
    Besides they’re like vampires, sucking us dry. Maybe the sunlight of scientific reality will stop them, but I’m more inclined toward the stake through the heart.

  74. Zeke the Sneak (10:32:19) :
    The last thing Obama wants or needs is for the EPA to regulate greenhouse gasses under the Clean Air Act. That would put the blame for the collapse of American industry on him and his administration. By having Congress pass Cap & Trade he can blame them for not doing it right.
    As for Obama signing the Treaty – he has already let it be known (Bolton and Moncton spoke about this on Beck) that the administration will act on Copenhagen whether the Senate ratifies it or not through administrative fiat. It will take years for this to go through the courts and by the time the Supreme Court rules the country will be frozen into this treaty as much as it is in the Law of Sea Treaty, which was not ratified.

  75. “There are and will be individual countries who will follow an individual course on emission reductions.” (Ron de Haan)
    Indeed there will be, but as a precedent setter, we (NZ) watch the USA, as I believe will Australian lawmakers.
    The beguiling fact is that it has always seemed that our centre-right government has acquiesced towards AGW for some reason, yet has been clever enough to murmur soothing noises to appease the media and the left without actually doing anything at all. Suggesting of course, that they believe it is BS anyway, but have to be seen to be following the UN/IPPC diktat.

  76. 3×2 (16:19:56) :
    Not UN. The Food Climate Research Network another UK Gov. funded fake campaign group (see our favourite – The Carbon Trust).

    Thanks for the correct!
    “The Carbon Trust–Towards a Low Carbon Future.” That sounds cold. Maybe one of the Brits around here would make a good carbon broker for you. They are good with numbers!

  77. UN Sec-Gen Ban Ki Moon goes arm-twisting in Washington for a Copenhagen climate deal: click
    …while calling the U.S. “deadbeats”: click
    I was mildly surprised at the annual UN budget: $20 billion a year.

  78. In a previous thread I commented on “I wonder how many today could grow their own food?” If EPA demands the cuts as advertised it will because of lack of electrical power cause the harsh reduction of affordable food for the nation. Can you think dried beans? we are surely headed for hard times for the next few years. This fight isn’t over. Until the people get hungry. Until the family can’t earn enough to heat and feed themselves and must choose between there will not be a true effort to stop this madness because the young of this country can’t remember a time with out TV, the Internet, electric lights, (I remember when they were turned on the first time in rural north Mississippi.) many families had only one vehicle and some had no vehicle. NO it will be only after the hard times come that the people will rise up and change the shape of our political powers that be. When other peoples money is no longer enough this madness will die.
    Just my rant. It gives me a headache thinking of the possible harm to the masses. I fear for the common man and his family.
    Bill Derryberry

    • Bill in Vigo.
      If it gets that bad it will be too late. There’s more than 2.5 billion Chinese and Indians who won’t be sitting still waiting for the comeback of the United States.

  79. Ron de Haan,
    You are correct, they will not give up until their objectives are kicked to death on the ground. “They” being the invisible “wise” men like the Club of Rome (who elected them?), the IPCC (who elected them?), the various UN-appointed persons (again, who elected them?)
    Apparently this wealth-redistribution tactic has failed, so I imagine migration will be the next gun to the head of the West.

  80. Thomas J. Arnold. (09:13:55) : …not forgetting the gullible EU commission – who are more pro AGW than even the British!
    No, Thomas, they are not gullible at all. This is how they make their living; and have for quite some years.

  81. jeez (19:11:02) :
    That’s the National Security side of the equation. Weaken the US and the West that badly, and armies under the thumb of dictators will not lack for resolve.
    It also must be weighing heavily on the President’s mind. Something has him doing quadruple-takes on Afghanistan.
    Kill the Climate Bill, kill the Health Bill, and start doing an American production bill. Look at the store shelves. Flip the items over to see where they are coming from. It’s getting worse.
    If the President can hold out for the other side of the coin (as in Eikenberry on Afghanistan), surely he is capable of holding out for the other side of the coin on Climate Change.
    Like a bankrupt company that must tell the court how they plan on paying off thier debt, the US must present to China how it plans on restoring it’s financial house, or China will pull the plug on us.
    The Climate Bill and Copenhagen, either one of them, will result in a US collapse. The buck stops at the President desk, for the day that it does not, it goes straight to the wastepaper basket.
    Climate Change is for migratory birds.

  82. “Mr. Kerry said he is focused on getting the 60 votes necessary to pass controversial climate legislation ”
    Yeah, it takes 60 votes to get the bill to debate. It won’t go to vote until Reid is certain he has the votes to pass it, and he does not. It’s too close to midterm elections.
    Now, we have what looks like a cruel winter shaping up. Nothing like a slushy to cool off vivid imaginations of burning skies.

  83. /me reminds Anthony –with all respect and admiration– of his stated desire of a couple months ago to update the current status of the Surface Stations project. . . .

  84. Jeez,
    For some folks it is already that bad. Why do you think that the stimulus package was so unevenly distributed, check where the money went. I am glad that I am in a very rural community. When it gets bad I wouldn’t want to live in a large city or town. I really fear for the people of the country. After Katrina there were near food riots in some large cities in the Midwest and southeast due to fuel shortages delaying delivery of commodities to the cities due to lack of fuel.
    It isn’t going to be pretty, In fact picking dried beans Saturday lol just to show the grandchildren how it used to be done. Should be fun.
    Bill Derryberry

  85. Zeke the Sneak (12:01:51) wrote:
    “perfluorocarbons–help me out here, I think this is all refrigeration. What would life be without the ol’ ‘fridge?”
    The teflon used in non-stick frying pans is one example of a perfluorocarbon. To the best of my knowledge, perfluorocarbons are not used as refrigerants.

  86. rbateman (20:38:52) :
    ““Mr. Kerry said he is focused on getting the 60 votes necessary to pass controversial climate legislation ”
    Yeah, it takes 60 votes to get the bill to debate. It won’t go to vote until Reid is certain he has the votes to pass it, and he does not. It’s too close to midterm elections.
    Now, we have what looks like a cruel winter shaping up. Nothing like a slushy to cool off vivid imaginations of burning skies”.
    This is how Reid thinks about fossil fuels.
    “Coal makes us sick. Oil makes us sick. It’s global warming.
    It’s ruining our country. It’s ruining our world.”
    – Harry Reid,
    U.S. Senate majority leader
    From http://green-agenda.com
    I remember the history lessons that educated me about the rise and downfalls of civilizations, the Big War, the Second World War and characters like Hitler, Stalin and the Emperor of Japan very well
    These characters had scary idea’s and tactics that eventually killed millions of people. They were criminals
    I remember that I was quite relieved to know this belonged all to the past and those criminal monsters were long dead.
    Having served the Air Force protecting the border between Germany and the East Block, I was even more relieved when the Berlin Wall fell and the Cold War came to an end, only twenty years ago.
    But now, in our time I realize that even bigger monsters than Stalin and Hitler have stood up and they are lining up for the biggest power grab in human history.
    Historians often wonder how it was possible that Hitler came to power after he made his completely sick and disturbed doctrines public by publishing his book “Mein Kampf” years before he came to power.
    Today individuals with much more disturbed views than Hitler, views about population control population reduction, the destruction of Capitalism and the Industrialized World, schemes that would dwarf the combined legacies from Hitler and Stalin put together, schemes that have been published in detail by the Club of Rome and the UN years ago, are now prominent members of the current US Administration, the UN and other Government Institutions World Wide.
    This leaves me with the same inconvenient question that historians asked about Hitler?
    How the hell is it possible that these characters have acquired their current power positions in our Administration and Government Institutions?

  87. A deep heartfelt “thank you to everyone” who wrote to their congressman and / or senator, or in any other way took part in letting the voice of reason be heard, in spite of the near boycott of the truth by most media. To European readers : our American friends have showed us the way, the fight continues, let’s defeat this over here too.

  88. APS fat cats stick to the sinking AGW bandwagon
    “Bad news which is however hardly surprising.
    The APS has prepared a negative response to the letter by 160 physicists (see:
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/?s=APS+160+scientists) including Ivar Giaever and Will Happer who wanted the society to return to its scientific roots when it comes to the topic of climate change and who proposed a new climate policy statement.
    What was the procedure leading to the official APS reply? The current APS chairwoman Ms Merry Cherry (or so) constructed a “reliable” six-person committee that was asked to recommend the APS Council what is the right way to respond.
    Not too surprisingly, the committee recommended to say “No,” and the APS Council – whatever it means – “almost unanimously” decided to reject the proposal to update the APS statement on climate change on behalf of all the APS members.
    The radical alarmist blogosphere started a new campaign to sling mud upon the authors of the proposed new APS policy statement. For example, the not-so-gentle men at a Nature alarmist blog think that Will Happer has been discredited because top scientist Al Gore effectively fired him back in 1993 when Gore was the U.S. vice-president.
    That event must really weaken Happer’s credibility – especially because in a sane world, prominent scientist Will Happer would strongly influence these matters while Al Gore would be severely punished for his unacceptable political interventions to science.
    Joshua B. Halpern of Howard University is also promoting an analysis that tries to show that most signatories of the letter are mature or older (what a sin!) and many of them even dare to prefer the Republican or Libertarian Party over the Democrat Party.
    That must be the ultimate crime in the contemporary Obamaland and especially in the APS, right? Is it really hard to see that these climate “scientists” behave just like the brown shirts while Merry Cherry and Barack Obama are giving them a similar type of institutionalized backing as Adolf Hitler was giving to the brown shirts?”
    http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/11/aps-fat-cats-stick-to-sinking-agw.html

  89. As long as Government Institutions, the UN IPCC and organizations that represent our scientists stay in support of the AGW doctrine, we are not safe.
    I am in full support of Will Happer who wants the APS to return to its scientific roots and I think his initiative should be extended to the UN IPCC, and any other scientific institution currently in support of AGW.
    Only if we reach an agreement about the science we can put pressure on the political establishment.
    Don’t underestimate the importance of such a process.
    We need the official surrender of the AGW doctrine, otherwise we won’t be able to stop our policy makers destroying our economies.

  90. Roger Carr (20:06:53) :
    You are quite correct Roger.
    It should have read;
    “and not forgetting the alarmist eco-fascists of the European Commission, who want to use the AGW scam in order to browbeat all European Citizens into kowtowing to our mighty overlords, who are omniscient and omnipotent and will lead us into the promised land of plenty, where we are ‘free’ and do not/are not allowed to pollute the atmosphere with evil CO2. Having our best interests at heart, we the meek are dependent in our ovine submission to our betters and masters – who will do the thinking for us and tax us appropriately – all praise to the commission.”

  91. “LarryF (21:10:33) :
    The teflon used in non-stick frying pans is one example of a perfluorocarbon. To the best of my knowledge, perfluorocarbons are not used as refrigerants.

    Well PFC has to be something essential to our modern standard of living, and and without which our economy couldn’t function. Otherwise the EPA wouldn’t want to regulate it.
    So what else could it be? :-]

  92. It is reported from The APEC Meeting (The APEC currently represents about 1/3 of the World Population and produces over 50% of the Global GDP.), currently underway, that the manufacturing of technology to prevent “Climate Change” is the way out of the current Global Economic Crises. We know a.o from the Red Neck Blog that the opposite is the case.
    We only make money if we produce and sell an expensive car made from cheap coal energy and cheap steel. We can’t create value with high priced energy generation technologies that come with low energy output. It’s as simple as that.
    But who explains that to our seriously confused world leaders?
    We now live in times where legislation to cut back the use of fossil fuels is called “energy security”, where the destruction of millions and millions of jobs is called “the Green Job Generation” and “profit” has become a dirty word, unless you are working for the Government.
    From another front: initiatives to boost teleconferencing to prevent business people from flying in order to save the environment! With all security issues which come with teleconferencing technology only a serious suicidal corporation would risk using this technology by it’s staff, especially when strategic market issues and technology is addressed.
    You never know who is listening in on your conference, do you?
    And besides that, who needs an Aircraft Industry if humanity is not going anywhere!
    I wonder how the world will look like if all opportunities to generate “value” and make a few bucks are cut off?
    I think the world is going to look like one big zoo and after some time it will start burning.
    In the Netherlands the recent wave of application of solar panels has generated an entirely new wave of crime. It’s called Solar Panel Theft and it is on the rise.
    I also heard the number of dope dealers, fire arms, hostage takings and human trafficking are on the rise as well.
    That’s comforting information, especially if we know that in the USA currently at least 10 States are on the brink of bankruptcy and no longer be able to fund their Police Forces, their Schools and their Medical Services.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574528403761438822.html

  93. “… maybe they are really just worried about their own jobs.”
    Thank the Force for that! Representatives of the sovereign people should always be worried about their masters.
    If predictions for a cold winter in the eastern U.S. verify–or at least for a prolonged spell of well-below normal temps for much of the country, and for greater snowfall totals than in the last few winters in the stretch of the I-95 Corridor from D.C to NYC (not saying a whole lot)–reality may have the last word.
    But of course, ‘That’s not climate, that’s weather’. Bingo! weather is reality and climate is an abstract derivative.

  94. This “Energy Bill” is welfare for Wall Street. It will not make us less dependent on foreign energy but it will make us dependent on foreign Carbon Credits. How stupid is that?
    How to take it out off EPA’s hands? Easy. Petition State and Federal “Law Makers” to declare CO2 gas a non pollutant.
    I know, easier said than done.

  95. I will hold to my promise I made to my legislatures via email: Any vote for CO2/AGW schemes will result in me NEVER voting for the idiots again. I would rather vote in a worm. Their brains are bigger.

  96. “And I’m confident that the American people will recognize the enormous opportunity around a clean energy economy and the ability for us to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions,” he adds.
    What we are finally realizing is that we cannot have a vibrant economy if regulation of GHGs are artificially shutting down industry, and enriching commodities traders. This is a transition – not a sprint.
    There is a healthy lack of the expression “Climate Change” in the President’s language. Redirecting the campaign to the issue of energy consumption and independence is the key to an accord acceptable by critics.
    This would also mean PR stunts with children imploring the President to go to Kobenhaven to save the polar bears… cease. Leave the children out of it.

  97. Clinton: No binding climate deal at Denmark talks
    MANILA, Philippines – Next month’s climate change summit in Copenhagen is not likely to produce a legally binding treaty to cut the greenhouse gas emissions that are widely blamed for global warming, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday.
    Speaking to a town hall meeting of students at a university in the Philippine capital, Clinton said the Obama administration would push instead for a strong “framework agreement” that could become a template for an eventual enforceable pact.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091113/ap_on_bi_ge/climate_change
    “the Obama administration would push instead for a strong “framework agreement” that could become a template for an eventual enforceable pact”
    That is exactly that part of the Copenhagen Agreement Lord Monckton has been warning us for. It’s exactly that part of the agreement why they started the climate change hoax for in the first place.
    An enforcable pact = World Government
    Watch this with the eyes of a hawk and call those Senators that we don’t want the US to sign of it’s sovereignty, tell them CO2 is no climate driver and the IPCC is wrong.

  98. rbateman (15:46:54) :
    “Cap & Trade better than EPA? I doubt seriously that a 50%+ surcharge on everything would be better than a 50%+ tax on all industry.
    It matters not whether your car hits a 6′ through oak tree or a brick wall at 65mph.
    The vehicle and passenger are both going to get totaled”.
    I say no surrender to the hoax.
    The push from EPA is intended to pressure the Senate.
    The establishment want their Cap & Trade.
    If the Senate decides positive we are screwed.
    EPA can be put on trial and it cold take years of legal procedures to quite them down.
    In the mean time the opposition will grow.
    If they can’t be stopped, pack your stuff an look for another country and turn in your passport. This can be done easily and there still are fine places with a good level of development, good medical services and fast internet.
    What will a Government do if millions of Americans tun in their passports?

  99. How to take it out off EPA’s hands? Easy. Petition State and Federal “Law Makers” to declare CO2 gas a non pollutant.
    That will never do. You have to have a positive spin. Declare it a Tree Food and enact a small subsidy. If you want opposition to AGW non-sense it is a good idea to buy it. Cheaper than shutting down our power systems.

  100. “What will a Government do if millions of Americans tun in their passports?”
    What will EPA officials do if they are put on trial for high crimes and misdemeanors?

  101. Thanks much for all the effort – BOOKMARKED.
    I am hoping for a very frigid winter this year with the Thames, the Hudson and the Potomac rivers frozen solid. Even then they would twist it around and blame it on Mankind…Sigh
    I wonder if tabling the Cap and Trade bill is so Pelosi and Waxman can concentrate their political clout on Waxman’s other treasonous bill HR 2749 (food Safety) It has already passed the house by an overwhelming majority.
    The bill has some very strange wording such as ” HR 2749 would give FDA the power to order a quarantine of a geographic area, including “prohibiting or restricting the movement of food or of any vehicle being used or that has been used to transport or hold such food within the geographic area.”” http://farmwars.info/?p=1145
    The bill allows the government to micromanage farms and gardens. You would think they had learned from the fiasco they made of farms in the USSR. Given we no longer stockpile surplus, we may have the choice between starvation or freezing to death in coming years… If that is you can find a job to pay for food and heat.
    I sometimes think those currently in power have let their victory at the polls in 2008 go to their head and are literally running mad as they try to establish complete control over every aspect of our lives.

  102. Gail Combs (07:27:18) : Thank you for the heads up on HR 2749.
    It seems Congress has so much time on its hands, it wants to manage the dirt under your feet, too.
    S.Res.440A resolution recognizing soil as an essential natural resource, and soils professionals as playing a critical role in managing our Nation’s soil resources.
    Recognizes:
    (1) the necessity to develop and implement best practices for the long-term use of the nation's soil resources; and
    (2) the important role of soil scientists and soils professionals. Acknowledges the promise of soil scientists and soils professionals to continue to enrich the lives of all Americans by improving stewardship of the soil, combating soil degradation, and ensuring the future protection and sustainable use of our air, soil, and water resources.

Comments are closed.