Boehner hits the nail on the head
President Obama’s soon-to-be-revealed second-term climate change proposal is “absolutely crazy,” Speaker John Boehner said Thursday.
The Ohio Republican was incredulous when asked to react to reports that the White House plans to regulate carbon emissions from power plants as part of its climate change strategy.
“I think this is absolutely crazy,” Boehner said at his weekly press conference. “Why would you want to increase the cost of energy and kill more American jobs at a time when American people are asking, ‘Where are the jobs.’ “
From:The Hill’s E2-Wire
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well at last, this thread recognises and displays the inescapable fact that the debate is political and not about science. Jai rolls in here with his absurd alarmism which simply highlights the disaster movie script the AGW story is.
The king has no clothes and more and more voting taxpayers are seeing this for themselves.
” Fuel/Technology Dollars per megawatt-hour
________________________________
Natural Gas, Petroleum Liquids 0.63
Coal (pulverized) 0.64
Hydroelectric 0.84
Biomass 2.00
Nuclear 3.10
Geothermal 12.50
Wind 52.48
Solar 968.00
_______________________________”
http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Zycher%20Senate%20Finance%20renewables%20incentives%20testimony%203-27-12.pdf
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/07/cbo-debunks-myth-that-tax-code-favors-oil-over-renewables/
I’m perfectly fine with removing the tax breaks for the fossil fuel industry as long as we get rid of all of the green subsidies as well. I know which one will still be around when the dust settles.
Oh, and don’t trot out some crap analysis that lumps in all sorts of defense spending for fossil fuels. Given our anguished president and the previous neo-cons we’d still be acting as the world’s policeman and meddling in the Middle East even if there weren’t any oil there if only because Israel would still be there.
jai mitchell says:
June 20, 2013 at 9:25 pm
dbstealey
you didn’t check that the money I mentioned is actually tax subsidies given by the government to the shareholders. Most of whom moved it offshore.
——————————-
That last statement just demonstrates your fundamental ignorance. Source? Are you confusing the roughly $1.5TT held by American multinationals outside of the US with actual shareholders? How exactly do shareholders magically transport these profits offshore after they’ve been paid onshore? Do the unicorns carry the money to the Caymans?
jai mitchell says:
June 20, 2013 at 9:12 pm
“goodness, you are a tough nut. . .”
Depends on how you want to look at it. I ask questions, I get non-responsive answers. I ask them again. That isn’t the tough part, that is the “I understand dodge and weave part.”
It is OK to be concerned with “The maximum sea level rise (steady state) and comparable to the Eemian (or any other interglacial) is a steady state value not a transitory one. It will only be reached when a plateau of warming is reached and then we stay there for several hundred years while the ice shelves melt.” But such absolutely does not address the fact that we end up somewhere between 10 to almost 100 times that anyway, at the end extreme interglacials. So how does any estimate of AGW or CAGW sea level rise, a poignant measure trump that?
The signal to noise fail comes with things like:
“The geology of the Last Interglaciation (sensu stricto, marine isotope substage MIS 5e) in the Bahamas records the nature of sea level and climate change. After a period of quasi-stability for most of the interglaciation, during which reefs grew to +2.5 m, sea level rose rapidly at the end of the period, incising notches in older limestone. After brief stillstands at +6 and perhaps +8.5 m, sea level fell with apparent speed to the MIS 5d lowstand and much cooler climatic conditions. It was during this regression from the MIS 5e highstand that the North Atlantic suffered an oceanographic ‘‘reorganization’’ about 11873 ka ago. During this same interval, massive dune-building greatly enlarged the Bahama Islands. Giant waves reshaped exposed lowlands into chevron-shaped beach ridges, ran up on older coastal ridges, and also broke off and threw megaboulders onto and over 20 m-high cliffs. The oolitic rocks recording these features yield concordant whole-rock amino acid ratios across the archipelago. Whether or not the Last Interglaciation serves as an appropriate analog for our ‘‘greenhouse’’ world, it nonetheless reveals the intricate details of climatic transitions between warm interglaciations and near glacial conditions.”
Hearty and Neumann (Quaternary Science Reviews 20 [2001] 1881–1895) http://www.uow.edu.au/business/content/groups/public/@web/@sci/@eesc/documents/doc/uow014948.pdf
or:
Which even in the best case, MIS-11, falls way short of:
“A small, protected karstic feature exposed in a limestone quarry in Bermuda preserved abundant sedimentary and biogenic materials documenting a transgressive phase, still-stand, and regressive phase of a sea-level in excess of 21.3 m above present during Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 11 (400 ka) as determined by U/Th dating and amino acid racemization. Cobbles and marine sediments deposited during the high-energy transgressive phase exhibit rim cements indicating a subsequent phreatic environment. This was succeeded stratigraphically by a still-stand deposition of fine calcareous lagoonal sediments containing bioclasts of red algae and benthic and planktonic foraminifera that was intensely burrowed by marine invertebrates, probably upogebiid shrimp, that could not be produced under any condition other than sustained marine submergence. Overlying this were pure carbonate beach sands of a low-energy regressive phase containing abundant remains of terrestrial and marine vertebrates and invertebrates. The considerable diversity of this fauna along with taphonomic evidence from seabird remains indicates deposition by high run-up waves over a minimum duration of months, if not years. The maximum duration has yet to be determined but probably did not exceed one or two thousand years. The most abundant snails in this fauna are two species indicative of brackish water and high-tide line showing that a Ghyben-Herzberg lens must have existed at > þ 20 m. The nature of these sediments and fossil accumulation is incompatible with tsunami deposition and, given the absence of evidence for tectonic uplift of the Bermuda pedestal or platform, provide proof that sea-level during MIS 11 exceeded +20 m, a fact that has widespread ramifications for geologists, biogeographers, and human demographics along the world’s coastlines.”
http://www.uow.edu.au/business/content/groups/public/@web/@sci/@eesc/documents/doc/uow014948.pdf
I think the problem here is cognizance of signal to noise ratio (SNR).
I am presumed to be unaware that whatever the prognostication of AGW is, that such is anomolaus. The problem here is, that whomsoever’s prognostication of CAGW is to be discussed, you have not met the minimum specifications. “WE” have to be anomalously higher than whatever (hopefully recently, as in post-MPT time) has already occurred. The Holocene has yet to reach end-Holsteinian (MIS-11) or end-Eemian (MIS-5e) sea levels, at the very least. The most obvious recognition of global, repeat, global warming.
In essence, you are asking me to concede that whatever was most recently achieved, in terms of the most telltale effect (sea level rise), pales insignificant against anthropogenic sea level induced rises that are some 1-10% of those we have most recently already seen.
Jai, you need to up your AGW/CAGW game. If AGW/CAGW induced climate change is certain to occur, I simply cannot hear your anthropogenic signal against the backdrop of so much greater non-anthropogenic, normal, end extreme interglacial, natural noise.
Which is why you need to up your game.
Just sayin………
The software app (I forget which WUWT blogger coined this – sorry!) called “Jai” retrieved a quote about the Tesla off the internet and said it was a fine car. LAUGH-OUT-LOUD. Whoever programs that app needs to refine its search parameters. The Tesla is a HOAX.
This is a CAR:
Jai what is the percentage of man caused C02 to total Co2?
Jai, before wriggling your toes in what you just stepped in you may wish to (re)consider:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/05/on-“trap-speed-acc-and-the-snr/
jai mitchell Those warnings of climatologists to president Bush were done 9 years ago.
Could you share with us how did you manage to survive all those climate cataclysms?
Sharing your experience will help others live.
Now, that according to climatological predictions from a few decades ago, the only species surviving the 0.4C warming are humans, house pets and mosquitoes.
jai mitchell says:
June 20, 2013 at 9:25 pm
dbstealey
you didn’t check that the money I mentioned is actually tax subsidies given by the government to the shareholders. Most of whom moved it offshore.
++++++
Jai: You continue to be confused or you’re intentionally dishonest.
You don’t understand what subsidy means or you choose to lie about it. Subsidy is another term that has been taken hostage by liberalism. It is designed to confuse gullible people, and the term is well exploited by you and your ilk.
Oil companies are not ever given other people’s money. Period. It’s all of their money – and the government takes it from them. That they get tax write offs means that the government take less than they would have. It’s starts out as money they earned and ends up in the government’s coffers.
Green companies are given other people’s money. Money that was not earned by them, but ended up in their possession. The money comes from other people, which first gets into the government’s control, pads a few pockets and then gets paid to Green companies in what I would call actual subsidies. Green companies are in fact existing because they are given other people’s money.
I will not let you and your ilk get away with calling a tax write off a subsidy and pointing to some links and calling it proof.
You are incorrigible.
Lol Gail,
Ok that might happen but not until the powers that be notice that us satellite emissions for CO2 went up instead of down. By that time the temp question may be answered properly.
SAMURAI says:
June 20, 2013 at 7:58 pm
I really to know how the US survives this assault.
—————————————————————
Read John Brunner,s “And the Sheep Looked Up”.
If it is true that the best thread-jackers are the ones who do it unwittingly, Jai is in a class by him(her?)self. At a glance, I would say at least third of this one, and that’s after Anthony outed him as an eco-loon with a shaky hold on reality.
C’mon people! I don’t know about you, but my blogging time is limited. So is my concentration, and it takes a lot of it to skim & skip the chaff. Don’t feed the auto-trolls. (Exception as always for Gail Combs, who always provides a wealth of useful info (which I always copy into my Climate Files)).
But to business. Obi-Wan has to know that he doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell of getting his nutso plan passed in the time he has left. The Republicans will crucify him on jobs. I think he’s just tossing the greens another bone.
Yeah, I know – candidate Obama said he’d jack electricity prices through the ionosphere. Candidate Obi also said he put a stop to NSA snooping. President Obama got bitch-slapped by reality.
He cant stop Aqida despite killing Bin Laden,He cant stop the Taliban ,He cant the Economic Recession ,He cant stop school shootings ,He cant stop Guns and crime.
And now he thinks he can stop Hurricanes and Tornadoes.
That man certainly knows how to make a rod for his own back.
Climate Change is a political graveyard.Give it lip service to please the Liberals otherwise dont bother.It don’t exist there’s nothing to bother about.
I wonder if Jai sources his info from the Al Gore site(s), Reality Drop or Climate Reality Project, that was setup recently apparently providing information to debunk the positions of those who don’t support the aCO2 driven CAGW hypothesis?
The President is in the habit of saying things that sound good at the time but that turn out to be nothing but bs. Jobs are suppose to be his number one priority and reduction of CO2 emissions is a real jobs killer. There is no evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate so even if the USA cuts out all CO2 emissions, even breathing, it will have no effect on climate. The center of climate change is the provider of all the energy that drives it, the sun. So to control climate one has to control the sun. So that is what the President needs to do, initiate a project to control the sun as if it were even possible..
Rich Lambert says:
June 20, 2013 at 6:31 pm
….. The Congress has to date done little to thwart the administration’s economy crippling carbon dioxide agenda.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Congress is bought and paid for.
As the IMF article showed the wealthy are doing just fine “…the share of the top 1 percent has close to tripled over the past three decades” Three decades ago would be ~ 1995 when Clinton got Congress to ratify the World Trade Organization and NAFTA after Bush Sr. failed to do so during his term.
If you bother to look at the Great Depression the same thing happened before, there was a massive transfer of wealth from the masses to the already wealthy.
This the view from one side When historians write about this era of U.S. history, how will it be described? I have a guess: “the Great Wealth Transfer” from the middle class to the wealthy.
And this is the view from the other side (Investors) But both agree it is the Greatest
But both agree it is the Greatest Wealth Transfer in History and it is from the middle class to the wealthy, not exactly what the socialists were hoping for.
William McClenney says: @ur momisugly June 20, 2013 at 9:54 pm
….I think the problem here is cognizance of signal to noise ratio (SNR)…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Most people do not understand that with the termination of an interglacial it is not the mile high glaciers due in several thousand year that is the problem but the wild bumpy ride between the two stable states or as Dr Brown call them ‘Strange Attractors’
Dr, Richard B. Alley of the U.Penn. chair of the National Research Council on Abrupt Climate Change and in 1999 was invited to testify about climate change by Vice President Al Gore, wrote in the executive summary of Abrupt Climate Change: Inevitable Surprises ( 2002 )
Like you, I sure hope CO2 is the ‘Magic Gas’ it is advertised to be. If you look at the effect of humidity in a desert vs in a rain forest, the main effect is to modify the temperatures making days cooler and nights warmer by about 10C link 1 and link 2
Sure would be nice if the ‘Magic Gas’ had that type of damping effect on climate over the long term but I doubt it.
Our fearless leader has tethered his hopes to a falling star. Either his advisers are idiots, and he is ignorant to heed them, or he is extremely cynical, and believes there is profit to be gained in duping the public with the falsified ideas of Global Warming. In either case, Truth is seen as something to be avoided, and Ignorance is seen as wisdom, or a sly craftiness.
It is mistake to think ignorance is a good thing. Ignorance is only bliss until the Truth hits you like a sledgehammer. To think you can be tricky, and keep others in the dark while spreading misinformation, scorns the power of Truth and the reality of Truth. Any gain you get from lying to others is short-term and, in the end, hollow. Like the flash of fireworks, the stars fall and fizzle out.
Our fearless leader has nothing to fear but Truth itself.
David Riser says:
June 20, 2013 at 11:10 pm
Lol Gail,
Ok that might happen….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
David, The EPA is ALREADY regulating wood stoves and in some places they are outright banned.
If you are a farmer considering the Biogas (methane) generator as a fuel source they cover that too.
SO no, it really isn’t a laughing matter.
The new energy cost has ALREADY gone from $16 per megawatt to $167 per megawatt in the Northeast and $357 per megawatt in Ohio link The real unemployment figures including discouraged workers is ~23% and the jobs shipped to the third world are not coming back. http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/07/16/what-is-the-real-unem
ployment-rate/”>having a job today is quite different from what it was just a few years ago: Many Americans have had their hours cut and are working for less pay. A Pew Research survey found more than half of all adults in the labor force had either lost a job or suffered a reduction in income because of the recession…
So energy costs are going up by a factor of 10X or more while real wages for male high school grads have sunk by 41% since 1970 so it now take two workers to earn what one used to earn. We already had a foreclosuregate so how in hades do you expect the next generation to be able to afford land and a home? And even if they did we have the Food Safety Modernization Act waiting in the wings to force them off if they try to grow a garden. link
Another toll-contributer: land devoted to biofuel production.
CORN, the Teucrium Corn Fund ETF (Electronically Traded Fund), is currently 42. It was 52 about three years ago and 50 about six years ago. Here’s a ten-year chart:
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/frames.asp?show=&insttype=Fund&symb=corn&x=41&y=14&time=13&startdate=1%2F4%2F1999&enddate=11%2F9%2F2012&freq=1&compidx=aaaaa%3A0&comptemptext=&comp=none&ma=1&maval=9&uf=8&lf=2&lf2=4&lf3=32&type=4&style=320&size=2&timeFrameToggle=false&compareToToggle=false&indicatorsToggle=false&chartStyleToggle=false&state=11
Here’s a ten-year chart for WHEAT; it’s at the bottom of its range:
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/frames.asp?show=&insttype=&symb=wheat&x=0&y=0&time=13&startdate=1%2F4%2F1999&enddate=11%2F9%2F2012&freq=1&compidx=aaaaa%3A0&comptemptext=&comp=none&ma=1&maval=9&uf=8&lf=2&lf2=4&lf3=32&type=4&style=320&size=2&timeFrameToggle=false&compareToToggle=false&indicatorsToggle=false&chartStyleToggle=false&state=11
If you think those will rise this year, there’s free money waiting for you there by being a bull.
Here’s a front-page, June 10 article in Barron’s (a well-respected financial weekly published by Dow Jones) on Tesla. The sub-headline reads: “Tesla’s electric car offers a quiet, powerful ride. But unless it comes up with a cheaper, stronger battery, the stock could turn out to be a lemon.”
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424052748703578204578523303280053948.html?mod=BOL_hpp_highlight_top#articleTabs_article%3D0&source=email_rt_mc_body
Gail Combs says:
June 20, 2013 at 2:44 pm
cwon14 says:
June 20, 2013 at 1:13 pm
For whatever the reasons, leading skeptics and you can include Anthony have steadfastly refused to be identified (directly) with the conservative mainstream meme that AGW was always politically left-wing in motivations….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is because we are NOT all conservatives (or liberals) and AGW is NOT all left-wing (or right-wing.) What CAGW is is a long con by those who want to revamp the world (Agenda 21) and by those who want to make lots of $$$$.
//////////////////////////////
Gail, this is a common confusion regarding subset issues like rent seeking and corporate opportunism of crony green benefits. The largest of which is the higher cost of energy than it would other wise be with rational environmental regulations and restrictions. The cost of green intervention and the restriction culture in North America might well have doubled the unit cost of carbon. It’s impossible to know exactly given the many cartel forces globally and predicting their reactions but more supply lowers cost even in a convoluted and politically impacted supply chain.
The key fact Gail is not every Liberal (in the U.S. use of the term) is a Marxist even if many have intellectual sympathy for that culture. They do believe in a higher level of government intervention and social control of government which is an essential feature of Green policy and AGW very specifically. Of the two forces politically I don’t think the mainstream AGW advocate is supportive due to rent-seeking advantages. It’s a Utopian-ism and moral sanctimony movement at the core. You are correct that skeptics are politically diverse and many are unwilling, perhaps largely due to inner conflicts, to connect the political ideology too directly that drives AGW beliefs at the academic levels especially.
All I know is that talking about “advocacy”, “bias” and “culture” in abstraction and uniformity of the debate (we do it and they do it, false equality) is highly counter productive to the truth of the situation. All very polite but very false. Listing conservative sell-outs, corporate rent-seekers of many political colors or finding an outliers who seem to be on the opposite of the mainstream stereotype of an AGW advocate isn’t going to change the conclusion. AGW has a strong leftist culture supported in a predominately leftist academic reality of today. To not explore it, state it directly and label it is gross negligence and weakness on the part of leading skeptics. It’s a leading reason the fraud of the AGW interventionism has advanced to the political mass of today.
On another front of the battle against climate nonsense
http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2013/06/20/2187831/climate-refugee-immigration-bill/?mobile=nc
Amendment Would Give Legal Status To People Displaced By Climate Change
“Senator Brian Schatz’s (D-HI) filed an amendment for the immigration bill Wednesday that would allow stateless people in the U.S. to seek conditional lawful status if their nations have been made uninhabitable by climate change.
The Senate’s immigration bill currently recognizes that people who come to the U.S. may have no country to return to for a variety of reasons and allows them to come forward to apply for legal status as a stateless person. But one cause for displacement that is overlooked in current law is how climate change has caused people to lose their homes and their nationality.
Noting that climate change is not some “abstract challenge,” but is already displacing people across the world, Schatz explained:
“The amendment I am proposing is quite simple. If enacted, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, may designate individuals or a group of individuals displaced permanently by climate change as stateless persons.
Again, let me be clear about what this amendment does. It simply recognizes that climate change, like war, is one of the most significant contributors to homelessness in the world. And like with states torn apart and made uninhabitable by war, we have an obligation not to deport people back to a country made uninhabitable by sea level rise and other extreme environmental changes that render these states desolate. It does not grant any individual or group of individuals outside the United States with any new status or avenue for seeking asylum in the United States.”
Last year alone, more than 32 million people fled their homes around the world because of climate-related disasters. Africa and Asia saw the worst impacts, and the highest number of people displaced last year.”
In other words, anyone who was in any way subject to weather anywhere in the world would be granted refugee status if they could make it to the U. S. and of course immediately signed up for government program on the books.
A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020.
Contradictory idiotic nonsense. If Britain experiences a Siberian climate, then the Oceans would be responding by “declining sea levels” not rising. Check the map, Britain is an island with the Atlantic Ocean on one side and the North Sea on the other. Cold weather produces snow and when that snow falls upon land it accumulates there and doesn’t go back to the ocean. Every ice age has the same result, declining sea levels as water is stored as snow and ice on the land.
If this is what passes for strategic thinking and analysis we are all in trouble. So much for the political argument trumping science. Political arguments are merely the twaddle of con artists attempting to fleece the sheep on a grand scale.