EPA fiats threaten American lives, livelihoods, living standards and life spans
Guest essay by Paul Driessen
The United States will “do more,” before it’s “too late” to prevent “dangerous” global warming, President Obama told Berliners last week. If Congress won’t act, he will, by regulating carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, increasing subsidies and reduce environmental overview for wind and solar projects on federal lands, and issuing other rules that will adversely affect economic growth and job creation.
Indeed, his Environmental Protection Agency is already devising new rules that will sharply curtail carbon dioxide emissions, by regulating thousands of facilities that use hydrocarbon energy – and thus ultimately almost everything Americans make, grow, ship, eat and do.
However, the manmade global warming “disasters” exist only in computer models and assertions by scientists who are addicted to billions in government Climate Armageddon grants. Moreover, the “preventative measures” are far worse than the disasters EPA claims to be preventing.
Even the most diehard alarmists have finally recognized that average global temperatures have hardly budged since 1997, even as atmospheric levels of plant-fertilizing CO2 climbed steadily. For many areas, the past winter was among the coldest in decades; the USA and Britain just recorded one their coldest springs on record; and satellite data show that Earth has actually cooled slightly since 2002.
The frequency and severity of hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts are no different from observed trends and cycles over the last century. 2012 set records for the fewest strong tornadoes since 1954 and the number of years with no category 3 or higher hurricane making US landfall. (The vicious tornadoes of recent weeks underscore how quickly the weather can swing back to normal patterns.) Arctic sea ice is within a few percentage points of “normal” levels for the past fifty years, and the rate of sea level rise is not accelerating.
These facts completely contradict computer model predictions and alarmist claims. Moreover, as Climategate and numerous studies have shown, the “science” behind EPA’s ruling that carbon dioxide “endangers” human health and welfare is conjectural, manufactured, manipulated and even fraudulent.
EPA is supposed to protect our environment, health and welfare. Instead, it “safeguards” us from exaggerated or illusory risks – by issuing mountains of costly, intrusive regulations that endanger our health, wellbeing and wildlife far more than any reasonably foreseeable effects from climate change.
This accumulation of anti-hydrocarbon restrictions and penalties is putting EPA in control of nearly every aspect of our lives. Fuel, compliance and business costs will soar. Companies will be forced to outsource work to other countries, reduce work forces, shift people to part-time status, or close their doors.
Poor and minority families will be unable to heat and cool their homes properly, pay their rent or mortgage, buy clothing and medicine, take vacations, pay their bills, give to charity, and save for college and retirement.
With twelve million Americans already out of work, and another eight million working multiple lower-paying, part-time jobs, EPA’s global warming and 1,920 other rules over the past four years translate into unprecedented sleep deprivation, lower economic and educational status, and soaring anxiety and stress. That will mean greater risk of strokes and heart attacks; higher incidences of depression, alcohol, drug, spousal and child abuse; more suicides; and declining overall life expectancy.
EPA’s new 54.5 mpg fuel efficiency standards will force more people into smaller, lighter, less safe cars – causing thousands of needless additional serious injuries and deaths every year – in the name of preventing illusory climate and oil and gas depletion crises.
Federal regulators use the same phony climate change and energy depletion arguments to justify letting wind turbine operators slaughter millions of birds and bats every year – including bald and golden eagles, hawks, condors and whooping cranes. They continue to promote and subsidize $50-per-gallon biofuels, to replace oil and natural gas that the world still has in abundance – thanks to new exploration, drilling and production technologies. This focus on biofuels also means more rainforests and other wildlife habitats are being cut down in the name of “renewable” energy.
EPA and President Obama never consider any of this, in calculating the supposed “benefits” of their onerous regulations. They refuse to recognize that their hysterical claims of climate cataclysms are increasingly indefensible. They ignore the damage that their heavy-handed rules impose on our health, welfare and environmental quality.
EPA finds, punishes and even targets anyone who violates any of its ten thousand commandments, even inadvertently. The agency’s climate change actions, however, are not inadvertent. They are deliberate, and their effects are harmful and far reaching. They will affect every American and 100% of our economy.
And yet, these increasingly powerful bureaucrats – who seek and acquire ever more control over our lives – remain faceless, nameless, unelected and unaccountable. They operate largely behind closed doors, issuing regulations and arranging sweetheart “sue and settle” legal actions with radical environmentalist groups, to advance ideological agendas, without regard for their impacts on our lives, livelihoods, living standards, health, welfare and environment.
They know that, for them, there is rarely any real transparency, accountability or consequences – even for gross stupidity, major screw-ups, flagrant abuses or deliberate harm.
We need to save our environment from environmentalists and EPA – and safeguard our liberties, living standards and lives against the arrogance of too-powerful politicians and bureaucrats. How we achieve this, while protecting our lives and environment from real risks, is one of the greatest challenges we face.
________________
Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death.
© Paul Driessen * June 20, 2013
Published in the Washington Times, Monday, June 24, 2013
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/24/climate-alarmisms-10000-commandments/
“reduce environmental overview for wind and solar projects on federal lands”
Interesting how protecting the envirnoment is so important that we must stop protecting the environment to acheive it.
even more interesting…..is when the real environmental and pollution/health issues are not even talked about any more
Environmentalists must be up in arms…………
Hotair did a post: Pro-Obama group to environmental activists: It’s probably best to just avoid economic arguments altogether. My comment:
“We must de-develop the United States.” -O’s Science Czar
You know why they are going to avoid economic arguments, because other than the bs pretense of fighting climate change, Obama and the radical greens real motivation is to sack the economy. Really. Obama’s “Science” Czar John Holdren said it as early as 1973, way before the agw scare; Holdren’s words: “A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States… [we] must design a stable, low-consumption economy.”
De-develop the United States?
Anything that promotes the economy in any way would be anathema to someone that wants to “de-develop the United States.” And Holdren has not recanted his position, and Holdren has remained as Obama’s trusted advisor for 5 years.
And energy is the most important key to economic vitality. So economic arguments won’t work here. Because Obama is simply thrusting a dagger into our economic heart by critically weakening our energy sector. Energy will be less abundant, and potentially much more expensive, especially electricity. There’s no upside. Industry and families are going to hurt – badly. Look what’s happening in Europe, and especially England. We are headed down that scary path.
“We have wished, we ecofreaks, for a disaster… to bomb us into the stone age, where we might live like Indians, with our localism, our appropriate technology, our gardens, our homemade religion, guilt free at last.” -Stewart Brand, Whole Earth Catalogue
“We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing …” -leftist Senator Tim Wirth, 1993
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” -Maurice Strong, ex UNEP Director
“We have to offer up scary scenarios… each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective [dishonest] and being honest [ineffective].” -Stephen Schneider, lead ipcc author, 1989
“The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.” -Daniel Botkin, ex Chair of Environmental Studies, UCSB
“….by regulating thousands of facilities that use hydrocarbon energy – and thus ultimately almost everything Americans make, grow, ship, eat and do.”
That is the bottom line. Carbon is at the heart of the very definition of “orgainic”. Carbon is life.
Control carbon and you control everything that eats sleeps and breathes.
Science be damned, that is what the eco-fascits are interested in. Obama also wants a “controlling” interest.
There are around 100,000 excess cold deaths in the US per year now. I bet this will quadruple it. These regulations will not go into effect untill 2018 when Obama has left office so it will be the next president saying it was Obama’s fault.
To paraphrase another famous statement … it has become necessary to destroy the environment in order to save it … 🙁
MarkW says:
June 26, 2013 at 11:36 am
“reduce environmental overview for wind and solar projects on federal lands”
Interesting how protecting the envirnoment is so important that we must stop protecting the environment to acheive it.
*
You summed it up perfectly, Mark. Makes you wonder when people are going to:
a) notice
b) get up in arms about it
When will skeptics put away all euphemisms and directly position the science fraud to the Green political structure?
Very few technical skeptics denounce the AGW political movement directly. Mocking the irrational science claims only takes you so far.
It’s a good article but the criminal enterprise isn’t going to stop because of it.
Eric: ” Look what’s happening in Europe, and especially England. We are headed down that scary path.”
Nothing to do the price of energy , all about bailing out the banks. The UK upped about as much to bailed thier banks as the US did. Now look at the ratio of (non banking) GDP or population. Almost an order of magnitude smaller than US.
At the bankers’ casino it’s one rule : heads we win, tails you loose.
Don’t confuse that with anything else.
Well, if they are serious, there should be an immediate USA ban, on carbonated beverages, including sparkling wines, and a complete ban on the production and use of dry ice.
A study:
Anthropogenic aerosol forcing of Atlantic tropical storms
N. J. Dunstone, et al. Nature Geoscience (2013) doi:10.1038/ngeo1854
Received 04 December 2012 Accepted 15 May 2013 Published online 23 June 201
presented in one of your other posts:
Asia’s air pollution may be keeping tropical storm activity down
Posted on June 25, 2013 by Anthony Watts
demonstrates that the inclusion of pollution (aerosols) data into the climate model better predicted historical hurricane activity in the Atlantic, more so than using natural climatic events.
Increased level of aerosols were consistent with decreased levels of hurricane activity,more so than was found from natural cycles. Otherwise, increased levels of aerosols influenced the climatic conditions that determine whether or not tropical storms develop and intensify into hurricanes.
Then, explain to me why changes in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere would not have an effect on climate and weather patterns over a period of time? Why would it not be prudent to adopt measures to mitigate the impact that human activity has on increasing levels of CO2 ?
More musings from the same dude who promisd to cut the deficit in half and close Gitmo.
Talk is cheap, but reading a telprompter makes you an expert,
george e. smith says:
June 26, 2013 at 11:59 am
Well, if they are serious, there should be an immediate USA ban, on carbonated beverages, including sparkling wines, and a complete ban on the production and use of dry ice.
And an immediate halt on exhaling.
🙂
Warmer, colder – who cares? As Jacques Chirac said when the Kyoto Protocol was signed, “It’s the first step toward global governance.”
JohnWho@June 26, 2013 at 12:14 pm
…at least until the population reduction goal is achieved.
the real crime is when the Federal Government begins taking over valuable family owned Farm Land throuth eminent domain laws in order to place Wind and Solar power generatiion facilities on this now “Federal Land”
Always 1 misspelling in everything we do, just to see if you’re paying attention
“A.D. Everard says:
June 26, 2013 at 11:55 am
Makes you wonder when people are going to:
a) notice
b) get up in arms about it”
People are too busy watching the Zimmerman trial now.
If you can’t get them up in arms over the NSA snooping or the IRS targeting people you won’t get them up in arms about carbon.
Too complicated a notion masked with a feel good wrapping.
Without the fortunate surge in shale gas and oil production, the US would be rooted already (by its govt). Without such oil and gas, the UK and Europe are rooted already.
daddyjames – Are we sure that the aerosols referred to are man-made? Is it possible that they are natural, eg. as in Svensmark’s theory? Just asking.
Let’s not forget all pets have to be forbidden. They have no useful purpose, consume precious resources, thus generating CO2 emissions, and transform oxygen into CO2 pollution.
Despite all the evidence contradicting the AGW theory, governments all over the world are still blindly riding the fight-against-climate-change bandwagon. Nothing seems to be able to stop the enormous inertia that faith in global warming has accumulated.
Utilities should cut the power to Government offices for about a week. Let them see what the future they desire holds.
BernardP @June 26, 2013 at 12:47 pm
Perhaps that is because, in their minds, global warming leads to global government. However, the governments which are leading the charge would not likely run the global government. That role will be demanded for the not-yet-developing countries, in the name of social justice.
“and reduce environmental overview for wind and solar projects on federal lands”
You know he’s nuts when he takes two terms in office to make any paperwork headway on federal lands management related to solar and wind. Labeling it with gigawatts of capacity on those paper shuffled lands amounts to laughing at the dolt public along the way. That is not even getting to the insanity of locating grid-competitive, solar cost leader projects in remote areas to serve far away cities. The transmission line costs are not free and the efficiency falls over those distances. They don’t even bother to understand what makes sense in their “don’t pick winners” misdirection plays. That should further demonstrate that this is all fund raiser fluff and puff and not even close to policy or real goal setting. We would be a real basket case nation if the interstate highway system had been sold and administered in this faked manner.
“Are we sure that the aerosols referred to are man-made?”
Or, are we sure that aerosols aren’t just another fudge factor to make the models fit reality?
I am not American but to have someone announce in a speech that they are going to usurp due process in order to pass laws sounds illegal to me.