“Energy Department climate office bans use of phrase ‘climate change’”

Guest post by David Middleton

DOE_Snowflakes

A supervisor at the Energy Department’s international climate office told staff this week not to use the phrases “climate change,” “emissions reduction” or “Paris Agreement” in written memos, briefings or other written communication, sources have told POLITICO.

Employees of DOE’s Office of International Climate and Clean Energy learned of the ban at a meeting Tuesday, the same day President Donald Trump signed an executive order at EPA headquarters to reverse most of former President Barack Obama’s climate regulatory initiatives. Officials at the State Department and in other DOE offices said they had not been given a banned words list, but they had started avoiding climate-related terms in their memos and briefings given the new administration’s direction on climate change.

[…]

News of the DOE office’s word ban drew criticism from one green group.

“What exactly is this office supposed to call itself now? The international C****** office? Ignoring the climate crisis will not make it go away, will not create jobs in the booming clean energy economy, and will not make our country great,” Liz Perera, climate policy director at Sierra Club, said in a statement.

Darius Dixon and Ben Lefebvre contributed to this report.

Politico

Setting aside the fact that it is truly idiotic for the Department of *Energy* to even have an office, department or bureau with the word “climate” in its name… The irony here is priceless.

The greatest governor in U.S. history is now the Secretary of the Department of… Ooops.

And the Department of Ooops now has an Office of International Climate and Clean Energy.

Getting back to truly idiotic government things… Why does the *United States* Department of Energy have an *International* office of anything?  Is the swamp really this deep?

Advertisements

152 thoughts on ““Energy Department climate office bans use of phrase ‘climate change’”

    • You mean like this one:

      Because we are now running out of gas and oil, we must prepare quickly for a third change, to strict conservation and to the use of … permanent renewable energy sources, like solar power. link

      Many people here might not remember the 1979 energy crisis.

      Our decision about energy will test the character of the American people and the ability of the President and the Congress to govern this Nation. This difficult effort will be the moral equivalent of war, except that we will be uniting our efforts to build and not to destroy.

      There was a previous 1973 oil crisis. These two events made us seriously worry about energy supply and promoted a lot of work on renewable energy. Then oil got cheap again and people quickly forgot about renewables.

      • I don’t remember the cause of the 1973 oil shortage but the 1979 was the direct result of OPEC flexing its muscles to intimidate the west, particularly the US.

      • 1973 was caused by an Arab boycott due to US support for Israel in the Yom Kippur War.

      • FWIW Jimmy Carter gave that address on April 18, 1977. Perhaps he precipitated the subsequent oil crisis?

      • While Yom Kippur was the trigger for the oil embargo, its root cause was nixon’s taking us off of the gold standard in 1971. Since oil was tied to the dollar, this wreaked havoc on the overseas market. By the time time late 1973 rolled around, OPEC had had enough. (at least that’s wikipedias version of events)…

      • The department of Energy doesn’t produce any. The department of education doesn’t educate, the department of urban development builds nothing. Anything else need to be said?

      • Carter was the cause of rationing. He set a price limit on oil, what we could pay, to protect the citizens from high prices.

        The cluelessness of this is why I’ve not voted for another democrat since.

      • David middleton,

        1973 was caused by an Arab boycott due to US support for Israel in the Yom Kippur War.

        No, not exactly true. When Kissinger was on the NSC in 1972, he wanted Sadat to get the Russians out of Egypt. In return for doing that, Kissinger promised Sadat that he would help him with getting the Israelis the land Egypt lost in the 1967 war. Kissinger knew that it was hurting Sadat’s reelection chances. Sadat agreed and sent the Russians packing.

        Kissinger did not keep up his side of the bargain.

        When Kissinger became SecState in September 1973, Sadat was desperate. (Golda Meir never trusted Kissinger; there was nothing he could do.)

        So Kissinger came up with the wild idea of Sadat starting a little war with Israel to get their attention, Which Sadat did on October 6th, I think. Sadat was keeping King Faisal of Saudi Arabia apprised of everything.

        Kissinger didn’t tell Israel what he had planned, and when Egypt’s attacked, Moshe Dayan was completely overwhelmed. His expression to Golda Meir was something like the greatest threat to Israel since the destruction of the Second Temple. Israel didn’t have planes, or weaponry to counter it. They were doomed he said.

        So Israel’s response was to load 13 nuclear warheads on missiles and point them at Russia and Damascus. (This is little known and denied by the Israelis today. However, an Israeli historian chronicled all this, I have the book around here somewhere.) As a result, Russia started moving warships down the Bosporous (sp?). King Faisal was furious that Kissinger’s plan was bogus and had backfired, so he cut production immediately in protest. The world had gone to Defcon Five or One, whichever is more serious.

        We in the US were completely unaware of this because our journalists were preoccupied with Watergate in its most perilous month. The Israelis were begging the US for planes and help. The Russian President told Kissinger this meant war, WWIII. The New York Times reported that Nixon agreed in an emergency meeting on a Saturday night to send Israel 67 fighter planes repainted stateside to look Israeli. I think it was either the 16th or the 17th. You can check the New York Times archives.

        Kissinger had to make an emergency overnight flight to Russia to explain the situation which he did on the day of the famous Watergate Saturday Night Massacre. Faisal meantime convinced the other OPEC countries to cut their production as well. Things calmed down a bit in the last week of October, but Ariel Sharon was pissed and crossed the Suez Canal into southern Egypt determined to destroy it.

        Kissinger and Nixon appealed on the strongest terms possible to Golda to stop Sharon, because if she didn’t Russia had promised to declare war. She got out of bed, took a helicopter in her slippers to where Sharon was situated, declared she was the Prime Minister and ordered him to stand down or Sharon would be charged with treason.

        Faisal was not someone to be crossed. He kept up the embargo and wreaked havoc in the US.

      • I was in school in ’79 and a lot of ChemE’s thought they might be going into the synfuels business, converting coal to oil. There was a lot of pilot plant activity at the time, carried over from 1973 and maturing in 1979. However, OPEC managed to always keep the price of oil just below the break-even for a full scale plant. In those days, people shelved uneconomical technologies instead of pouring more money in the pit.

      • Thank you. That proves the point once and for all that there is (was) no price high enough to enter the Green equations for policy-making. I suppose that’s also why taxpayers ended up with guaranteed oil price off take from Colorado shale oil contracts at 3x the market price.

      • MRW March 31, 2017 at 5:57 am

        Thanks for the great history lesson. I am very ambivalent about Kissinger. Your information makes me more so. When statesmen try to do great things, they often cause a lot of breakage. Reagan understood that. link

      • commieBob March 31, 2017 at 1:08 pm

        What a great article at the link you gave! Thank you. I’m a big fan of that kind of thinking.

      • Commiebob,

        See the follow-up story at MRW March 31, 2017 at 6:32 am. somehow got placed in wrong thread.

    • We need a Department of Energy and an EPA. That’s it. They do two different things, coming from completely different places. Full Stop! If some agency feels the need to “do something” about the Climate, I’d suggest they ring up some of those purported Native American pipeline protesters and give them a better job, employing their native dances and chants to propitiate the Climate gods. It’ll do exactly as much good as anything we’ve “done” to date!

      • Agreed, if Energy or EPA needs anything international, they go to State Dept, not end run around State. Current process leads to these “non-treaty” treaties

    • afonzarelli,

      While Yom Kippur was the trigger for the oil embargo, its root cause was nixon’s taking us off of the gold standard in 1971. Since oil was tied to the dollar, this wreaked havoc on the overseas market. By the time time late 1973 rolled around, OPEC had had enough. (at least that’s wikipedias version of events)…

      Wikipedia is 1000% wrong, See my response to David Middleton just preceding this for more details.

      The Saudis were not the rich dudes they are today in 1973. The rising oil price did nothing but overwhelm them with wealth and cripple the US, so they kept it up until Jimmy Carter undercut them in 1978 by deregulating natural gas (it shot up to around $2.60) and allowed the oil-fired plants to retool to use it (Reagan got the credit).

      Meantime, in a 1975 Memorandum of Understanding with the Saudis done through the Executive Branch (US Treasury) bypassing Congress, Kissinger promised to keep the price of oil/barrel high to benefit the Saudis, provided they agreed to sell their oil only in USD, and invested their oil profits in US treasury securities establishing and securing our status worldwide as the reserve currency, because every country would have to secure USD to pay for their energy needs. This was what firmly established our status as the world’s reserve currency. (Obama’s reckless sanctions on Russia (and the Iranians) threw the Russians to the Chinese who have lost no time establishing the first Chinese bond market in London, and the Yuan could become the reserve currency by 2030 if they can replicate our $750 billion daily treasury security market in that time.)

      Nixon taking us off the gold standard internationally was the greatest thing to happen to this country–what Nixon did will be understood 80 years from now–and had our journalists understood it, our prosperity today would have been a repeat and further increase of what heppened after WWII. We went off the gold standard domestically in 1933. It allowed us to win WWII and created the middle class.

      The reason Nixon did it was because in the 60s France was cashing in every USD they got for their fabulous wines and clothes for our gold at $35/ounce, and it was threatening our gold supply. So he decided to pull the rug out from underneath them.

      I suspect the Wikipedia entry was written by the Israeli Ministry of Information in a paid program run by Naftali Bennett to rewrite Israeli history on Wikipedia. The last thing Israel wants is knowledge of the extent their nuclear program known, or that they threatened the USA. [Excuse all typos.]

      • France was cashing in every USD they got for their fabulous wines and clothes for our gold at $35/ounce, and it was threatening our gold supply.

        Balance of payments is serious. In older days, it led to the Opium Wars. The Donald has to deal with it today.

      • Well, since we are the reserve currency, every country in the world that wants to buy oil needs USD. They can loot their treasuries and suffer the vagaries of the currency exchange rate, OR they can sell us their output by exporting it to us. And it is always a cost to the exporting country because they are using up their own resources in manufacturing the stuff they export. (Few understand this.)

        In other words, the single national reserve currency eventually breaks down because the reserve currency country destroys the credibility in the currency eventually because it must run deficits to provide the world with liquidity (provide the world with USD).

        I haven’t seen any real macroeconomic experts around Trump that can educate him. Ryan and McConnell are clueless. Both parties are on the balance-the-budget bandwagon, or ‘get rid of the national debt’ bullhorn, and fail to realize that because of the state of the economy right now, there needs to be massive federal government investment in infrastructure right now in order to alleviate the real unemployment of 9-10% (see BLS U6) in order to give the people the income to purchase these imports.

        From Paul McCullley, a brilliant macroeconomist:

        Thus, if and when there is insufficient aggregate demand to foster full employment at a just income distribution, the underlying problem is a deficiency of investment, not savings.

        More investment is the solution, and investment is constrained not by a shortage of savings, but literally a deficiency of investment itself.

        Let me say that again: Investment creates income and thus savings, not the other way around.

        This is the essence of macroeconomics, in contrast to microeconomics, which can also be called household economics. (And also state and local government economics.)

        The federal government is not a household! The federal sector has the legal ability, granted by the Constitution to Congress, to “coin money.” For all the rest of us, doing so is illegal.

        Thus, if and when there is too little private-sector investment to generate aggregate demand [sales] sufficient to generate full employment, in the context of a distribution of national income that passes a democratic smell test of social justice, the federal sector has the ability to do something about it:

        Invest/spend more and coin the money to pay for it.

        There is no debt to children and grandchildren. We’re not still paying for Eisenhower’s interstate highway system or Kennedy’s space program, or WWII, for that matter.

        It’s not clear to me that Trump understands these differences even though he acknowledged in an interview that the US federal government creates its own dollar.

    • In the first place, there is no such thing as global climate. There are global climata (or limates) as there are several of them and one or several may “change” one criterion or another, such as temperature or humidity. I have never learned the definition of global climate, and may be for the reason stated. There is no such thing.

    • Exactly – I’ve been harping on that for a long time. I love the move.
      The Office of International Global Warming and Clean Energy is a substitute but that dept should be eliminated.

    • Just remember that it buzz words were not always ‘Climate Change’ THAT was only substituted in when it became obvious that ‘Global Warming’ was NOT what was happening. It apparently didn’t occur to any of the PR folks that many the arguments for global warming were the opposite of those for climate change. Oh well! logic was never the objective anyway.

    • https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/01/27/wind-farm-study-finally-recognizes-that-all-is-not-well-with-wind-power/comment-page-1/#comment-2131348

      [excerpted]

      When you hear politicians and others talking about “Climate Change”, you are listening to the prattling of scoundrels and imbeciles. The reason they use the term Climate Change is because it is a non-falsifiable hypothesis – it can mean anything. Climate has always changed – naturally.

      To be precise, the threat alleged by the global warming alarmists is from catastrophic manmade global WARMING (“CAGW”) and that hypothesis was effectively falsified by the natural global cooling that occurred from ~1940 to ~1975, at the same time that atmospheric CO2 strongly increased.

      Fossil fuel combustion increased strongly after about 1940, and since then there was global cooling from ~1940 to ~1975, global warming from ~1975 to ~1996, and relatively flat global temperatures since then (with a few El Nino and La Nina upward and downward spikes). This so-called “Pause”.is now almost 20 years in duration, almost as long as the previous warming period. The correlation of global temperature with increasing atmospheric CO2 has been negative, positive and near-zero, each for periods of ~20 to 25 years.

      This so-called climate sensitivity to CO2 (“ECS”) has been greatly exaggerated by the warmists in their climate computer models – in fact, if ECS exists in the practical sense, it is so small as to be insignificant – less than 1C and probably much less. That means that the alleged global warming crisis is a fiction – in reality, it does not exist.

      The warmists have responded by “adjusting” the temperature data record to exaggerate global warming. Here is one USA dataset, before and after adjustments:

      • It is an actual Pause, a period of no significant temperature trend. Anyone with honesty in their soul admits to that (which is just about all “skeptics,” and even a majority of the “believers”).

        The schism is over what happens when the Pause ends. We may slide further into an interglacial high regime (even more like the MWP or RWP) – or back into the cold trough of a LIA. Indications from proven physical drivers of climate are for the latter. Or, we may oscillate back and forth for a while yet, just as we have for the last couple of centuries.

      • Hi Alan, have you looked at my latest work? I found measurements that show how water vapor regulates cooling at night. Late at night, the sensible heat from condensation supplements surface radiation, this combination reduces the cooling rate, just as a thermostat does. And since this is clear calm skies, space, even during the day is cold. The optical window in the middle of the surface temp’s average peak spectrum only has one water line, it’s straight to space. The rest change throughout the day.

        Because of the regulation, any co2 warming during the day, even exaggerated amounts are radiated, has to be radiated before natural water vapor regulation kick in in the early morning. TCS is easily less than half, and as the night get longer, any residual is lost . Water vapor regulates how warm the tropics can get, and water vapor regulates how cool it will get at night(within the energy available).
        https://micro6500blog.wordpress.com/2016/12/01/observational-evidence-for-a-nonlinear-night-time-cooling-mechanism/

      • micro;
        You, too. Tropic and Antarctic deserts prove your point. Lotsa CO2, quick and thorough night-cooling.

    • Legitimate government functions under the present-day construct of Dept Energy need to be split and clarified

      Part One: Energy Availability and Reliability – National policies devoted to promoting all forms of hydrocarbon [and incidental solar/wind, without subsidies] energy, enhancing their availability and abundance, and facilitating the nimble transfer of energy from place to place to enhance American economy and flexibility.

      Part Two: Nuclear Energy, specifically thorium-based, liquid fluoride reactors that are completely scalable, impossible to catastrophically fail, and able to consume backlogs of trans-uranic waste. Uranium-plutonium-based reactors (high-pressure) should be decommissioned after useful lifespan.

      All nuclear weaponry programs should be transferred to Dept Defense, with suitable civilian oversight

      • That’s the old Richard Pryor joke (can’t put it all here but the punch line is, as two men are urinating off of a bridge over a river) One says”.Damn! This water’s cold!” And the second says “Yea, and it’s deep, too!”..alluding to an issue of length…..hopefully I’m still on the correct side of site policy…..

    • Getting back to truly idiotic government things… Why does the *United States* Department of Energy have an *International* office of anything? Is the swamp really this deep?

      Frankly, I think there isn’t even a bottom.

      • A bit like the ‘World Series’ in which no other meaningful country (if any) plays a part in. Or has the world series been done away with now?

        I’m a Brit so not familiar with US sports.

      • @David Middleton

        Sorry if I offended our (Canadian) Canuk (a term adopted by the Central Association of Nigerians in the United Kingdom https://www.facebook.com/NewCANUK) brethren, my apologies.

        @MarkW,

        Hardly the way it’s promoted now though. Besides, why would a North American Newspaper adopt the title ‘World Series’, it’s almost as bad as a British newspaper adopting the title ‘News of the World’, eventually vilified as the UK gutter press, before succumbing to it’s own notoriety. Sadly, I believe it was at one time, in it’s dim and distant past, the newspaper to be relied upon for quality investigative journalism.

      • @David Middleton

        Toronto Maple Leafs play inmthe American league. Montreal Expos moved to D.C., and the city now qualifies for another team.

      • It’s NOT an “International Office of … “,
        it’s an “Office of International Climate …”

        Not the same, is it?

      • The mud in my paddocks is like that right now; sucks your boots right off your feet. But the government says we’re still in a “moderate drought.” Maybe they should go outside once in awhile? /sarc.

      • HotScot March 30, 2017 at 1:02 pm

        A bit like the ‘World Series’ …

        How about Miss Universe. The government needs a department of interplanetary affairs.

  1. “What exactly is this office supposed to call itself now? The international C****** office?”

    How about if we call it “Closed”

  2. “What exactly is this office supposed to call itself now? The international C****** office?

    How about we call it closed.

  3. The Energy dept (and every other dept) can be cut in half. They do however need a climate, or more specifically, a weather division to measure heating degree days and cooling degree days with accurate, un-adjusted temperature data.

    On a lighter note: this is so fun to watch.

    There is a statistic that should worry all of us: 97%. That is the percentage of people in the DC area that vote and donate as Democrats. That means that almost every person in that building, and all the others, wants to sabotage the new policies.

    • I have said elsewhere, that many of the government departments need to be decentralized. In the process many of the staff would not want to move and resign. Office rents are much less expensive away from DC. In the process a lot of staff would be renewed,and their wages would be lower, due to the lower cost of living, which would be a good thing.

      • But, ….. but, ….. but, ….. husbands, wives, courtesans, relatives, personal friends and/or political donors of the elected politicians would surely become irate and p-faced pouty iffen their lucrative “high-paid” do-nothing jobs are relocated several hundred miles from the DC area.

        The only reason they moved the FBI’s Fingerprint Division and the Lorton Reformatory (prison) out of the DC area was because the real estate they were situate on was worth billions of dollars.

  4. “…Ignoring the climate crisis will not make it go away, will not create jobs in the booming clean energy economy, and will not make our country great,”

    So much wrong there it’s impossible to know where to begin.

    Thank Christ I was born a “Crisis” sceptic.

  5. The Energy Dept has no reason to exist in the first place.
    Regardless the Energy Dept has absolutely no use for a climate office.
    It should be axed completely.

      • The Energy Information Administration and National Nuclear Security Administration are useful entities. Otherwise, the DOE is useless.

    • MarkW DOE also manages the consequences of the Cold War, and OPEC’s Oil War
      A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
      See National Nuclear Security Administration
      Re Stockpile Stewardship Program and preventing the spread and use of nuclear weapons worldwide.

      Established by Congress in 2000, NNSA is a semi-autonomous agency within the U.S. Department of Energy responsible for enhancing national security through the military application of nuclear science. NNSA maintains and enhances the safety, security, and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile without nuclear testing; works to reduce the global danger from weapons of mass destruction; provides the U.S. Navy with safe and effective nuclear propulsion; and responds to nuclear and radiological emergencies in the U.S. and abroad.

    • MarkW. The Energy Dept. has responsibilities for our nuclear deterrence; weapons development, evaluation, and production. Every other major nuclear power has upgraded and modified their nuclear weapons. But, the US has not and this is putting our nation at risk. All nuclear powers including Iran and North Korea have to know we have the best technology and weapon systems. We need peace through strength.
      Agree, DOE should have nothing to do with global warming, now called climate change.

      • I believe you just agreed with the first part, also? They have the responsibility to develop, evaluate, and produce nuclear weapons? Which you then say has not happened. Um, might be time to give someone else the responsibility, since they are obviously unable to fulfill it?

    • Actually it’s the Dept of (Nuclear) Energy. Funds various research efforts (unfortunately not LPPFusion.com, yet — not enough employees to vote in a congress-critter. Just world-best results.)

  6. “Booming” clean energy economy? An economy isn’t really “booming” if it is on subsidy life support. Every subsidy dollar is diverted from some other activity causing it to lose its own “boom”.

  7. So what is meant by the term “climate change” ?

    wikipedia:
    Climate change is a change in global or regional climate patterns, in particular a change apparent from the mid to late 20th century onwards and attributed largely to the increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide produced by the use of fossil fuels.

    NASA:
    Climate change is a change in the usual weather found in a place. This could be a change in how much rain a place usually gets in a year. Or it could be a change in a place’s usual temperature for a month or season. Climate change is also a change in Earth’s overall climate. This could be a change in Earth’s average temperature, for example. Or it could be a change in Earth’s typical precipitation patterns.

    UK MetOffice:
    Climate change is a large-scale, long-term shift in the planet’s weather patterns or average temperatures.

    • Funny how they all ignore the non-meteorological parts of climate change. “Climate” is much more than weather over time.

      • I would say that the interglacial periods would be only ones that could meet the terms of the MetOffice’s definition “, long-term shift in the planet’s weather patterns or average temperatures”
        The most conservative estimate of the ‘large-scale’ change certainly has to be at least + or – 1% of the long term average.

    • “Climate change is a change in global or regional climate patterns”

      …doesn’t tell us what climate is.

      Climate is weather history renamed to climate after the fact. It doesn’t physically exist.

      Andrew

    • The dictionary definitions of “climate” and “change” don’t contain the words “human”, “warming”, “carbon dioxide”, or “fossil fuels”. But put those two words together, and all that other stuff starts popping out.

      Isn’t that strange…

      • Eustace, you are right on. It’s all about creating an impression that something bad is happening. The science surrounding the impression is a steaming pile of dung when you actually sniff it.

        Andrew

      • don’t forget when the scarists use the term “Climate Change” the “Human Caused” part is silent BUT clearly implied …

    • Climate is what you could expect from weather, averaged over time.
      Weather is what you actually observe in the short run.

    • Apparently it can even mean a change to temperatures that already occurred.As such, climate change can be infinite and we wouldn’t even notice! Wrap your head around that!

  8. Has anyone noticed that the very same people who are warning about climate change are the same people who most want to intervene and change the climate?

    • Rob: I admire their arrogance (not) that they seem to think that they, and they alone, know what the ideal climate should be.
      Actually, on second thoughts, they don’t have any idea. They work on the principle that ‘crises’ are never resolved, otherwise, what would they do with their particular brand of politics?

      • To stay in power they need an ongoing crisis. If necessary they would even start WW III. Progressives will NEVER solve poverty or any other ‘problem’ because it’s the base for their existence and the excuse for BIG Government.

      • Mark;
        The Ebenezer Solution they want is “reduce the surplus population”. Except in Sanctuary Cities, I ‘spose.

  9. There was much premature rejoicing in the UK when the DECC (Dept of Energy and … CC) got scrapped recently, and of course much howling from the usual suspects, but the new Business and Energy Dept still has a CC minister, and all that happened was that the civil servants got new name badges.

  10. Oh yes. The swamp is deep, wide, and full of slimy creatures. They will fight all attempts to drain thier comfortable home. Can anyone in the MSM tell us what this office has accomplished. What it is supposed to accomplish. Liaison probably. We can do without that.

    • I’m sure they could tell you that this office is integral in “saving”: us, the Earth in general, polar bears, fluffy loaves of bread, the planet/exoplanet pluto debate, etc, and now we’re all doomed. Thanks Russia!

  11. You certainly won’t believe me, but here is the name of Quebec environment ministry: Minister of Sustainable Development, Environment and the Fight against Climate Change! That sounds like Orwell 2004 Ministry of true!

  12. Given the inexorable working over the past two and a quarter centuries of Parkinson’s laws:

    1. Work expands to fill the time allotted.

    2. Expenditures rise to meet income.

    3. Any administrative entity grows at a fixed rate unrelated to the state of whatever, if anything, it is supposed to administer.

    The great commode in Washington is more than overdue for a good flush.

  13. Repent and believe, sinner!
    YOU must believe!

    Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies. Rivers and seas boiling.
    …send money

    don’t wait another minute.
    ………. Pick up the phone and call the professional!
    The swamp creatures are hired and can’t be fired
    but need YOUR money to continue their lavish benefits!

  14. to be fair to all the many people who have formerly made a career off C-AGW grant money, I would be willing to support funds to retrain said people to be baristas at Starbucks, whose CEO has been so willing to help in such situations.

  15. Energy Department climate office bans use of phrase ‘climate change’

    Does it also ban ‘climate disruption’, ‘weather whiplash’ &. ilk?

  16. Quote: ” Why does the *United States* Department of Energy have an *International* office of anything”

    Why not? The USA has a “World Series” in Baseball.

    • Yeah… But it’s not an *International* World Series… apart from an occasional appearance by the Toronto Blue Jays.

      • And at one time the Montreal Expos, who it looks like might get a franchise again. ( and were denied a world title by the MLB by a strike and yes I think it was intentional :) )

      • Blind Freddy March 30, 2017 at 4:35 pm
        At least World Series Cricket in Australia has 3 countries competing sometimes.

        Not really, World Series Cricket was a breakaway tournament which only lasted a few years. The Cricket World Cup however involves about 14 international teams, is played every 4 years, and is the third largest international sporting event behind the Soccer World Cup and the Olympics.

  17. OT, but I just love WUWT and the contributions of its moderators, article posters, and commenters. This country would be partially, if not royally, screwed if not for the sensibilities and patriotism.

  18. “Climate change” is a redundant tautology and thus a meaningless phrase. Climate by its fundamental nature is and has to be always changeing. How could a dissipative open heat engine with a complex mixture of excitability (positive feedbacks) and friction (negative feedbacks) ever do anything but change continually, fractally on every spatiotemporal scale. “Climate change” is like saying “wet rain” or “radiative light”.

    • bingo … and when the climate … changes from one climate condition to another over centuries (not decades) it possibly could be beneficial or harmful to humankind … just because the climate may be changing does not mean it is harmful …

    • Edward Lorenz back in 1961 made a computer simulation of climate, showing clearly – and unexpectedly – that with no change to steady state inputs, temperatures spontaneously jumped from time to time between different thresholds and never tended toward any kind of stasis or mean. This confirmed the work of Cartwright, Feigenbaum and others in showing chaotic nonlinearity in climate. To this day this is the best and most meaningful, in fact the only important, climate computer simulation. On a 1961 computer.

  19. “What exactly is this office supposed to call itself now?”

    The Erstwhile Office of International Climate and Clean Energy?

  20. This is why you shouldn’t listen to government bureaucrat fools:

    “Peak oil is now.” German Energy Watch Group –2008

    “By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear..…” U.S. Department of Defense –2008 & 2010.

    “A global peak is inevitable. The timing is uncertain, but the window is rapidly narrowing.” UK Energy Research Centre -2009

    “The next five years will see us face … the oil crunch.” UK Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and Energy Security –2009

  21. Wonder what they will call it thousands of years from now when the climate is REALLY changing, as in getting colder?

    • Hi Pamela. In the early 1970’s it was global cooling (Ice Age predicted) caused by – you guessed it- increasing CO2 from use of fossil fuels. Go to my Dr. Vincent Gray link @ 6-27pm. Climate change can mean anything one wants it to by anyone wishing to obliquely ‘attribute’ any weather event to it.

  22. I am thoroughly enjoying watching the climate of the Washington swamp change as President Trump steadily gains control!

  23. The actual phrase “climate change” means nothing. 2 nouns without a qualifiying pronoun is meaningless. Climate changes.So what. Is it man-made? Is it natural? Is it dangerous? To humans? To the ecosystem? Can massive changes in human activity actually make the slightest bit of difference?
    It beggars belief how people have fallen for this 2 word slogan that actually means nothing. The nations of the world, supposedly led by intelligent people fighting on behalf of the People have fallen for this scam and are throwing trillions of (taxpayers) dollars to the very groups that promulgate the lies climate myths.
    The People will not be very happy when they find out how blatant a scam it was from day one. They will not be happy with mainstream media who deliberately fed the People with falsehoods. They will not be happy that the education system plugged such lies without permission. The People will not be happy how their supposed “leaders” have betrayed them on a range of other serious issues.

    • Climate change only comes into “existence” after the weather has “changed” and people have looked at the history and decided to call what they see “climate.”

      Andrew

  24. HotScot March 30, 2017 at 2:38 pm said:

    “it’s almost as bad as a British newspaper adopting the title ‘News of the World’, eventually vilified as the UK gutter press, before succumbing to it’s own notoriety. Sadly, I believe it was at one time, in it’s dim and distant past, the newspaper to be relied upon for quality investigative journalism.”

    Yes, the quality investigative journalism was notable for the punch line “Penetration then occured, so I gave my excuses and left.” Not for nothing was it known as the “News and Screws of the World”.

  25. Good question there Liz Perera, climate policy director at Sierra Club. What should the Department of Energy’s ‘Office of International Climate and Clean Energy’ be called?

    How about Office of Hot Air, effective as of 1/4/2018?

  26. David Middleton:

    This post is slightly off-topic because it pertains to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and not the US Department Of Energy (DOE) but – like your above report – this post relates to ‘draining the swamp’.

    Breitbart is reporting that President Trump’s appointee as head of the EPA, Scott Pruitt, seems to have ‘gone native’ and is “Failing to drain the swamp at the EPA”.

    James Delingpole provides a trenchant explanation of the matter that explains

    Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is more interested in building his political career than he is taking on the Green Blob, insiders report.

    Pruitt is also said to be behind attempts to remove at least one of the key phrases from the president’s long-awaited Executive Order on the environment.

    It concerns a proposal to repeal the EPA’s Endangerment Finding on CO2 (the disastrous, unscientific, job-killing ruling introduced during the Obama Administration, which rebranded the harmless trace gas Carbon Dioxide as a dangerous substance).

    emphasis added: RSC

    Richard

  27. A supervisor at the Energy Department’s international climate office told staff this week not to use the phrases “climate change,” “emissions reduction” or “Paris Agreement” in written memos, briefings or other written communication

    Is it possible that the instruction is designed to avoid FOIA searches for communications which the DoE would like to conceal?

  28. Just a thought. If the words climate change, emissions reductions, and Paris Agreement are not used in memos, briefings, and other written communication [e-mails], it is then much more difficult to search out those documents since those words would be some of the main search terms. Thus much harder to find out what is actually going on in the Energy Department with respect to associated files by outside parties (or new administrations).

  29. How about a tally of all the funds invested in the great fusion reactor promise year by year and in total.

  30. The measure is wrong.
    The more DoE employees talk about climate, the easier it is to figure out whom to fire.

  31. A proper name for what we originally called global warming in the 20th century and climate change in the 21st should all now be referred to as Climate Study based upon rigorous and high standards of collecting raw weather data. It will all make more sense in the future as we collect and analyze more raw weather data over time.

  32. Because the DOE is a relatively new department, it is overloaded with bureaucracy. Over 8 pages, single-spaced in the Plum book (list of presidential appointments required). You have never seen so many permutations of the words “Assistant” “Associate” “Deputy” “Special” “Director” “Under-Secretary” etc. You too could sign on to be the “Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oil and Natural Gas” under the Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy for example, or the “Special Assistant and Scheduler to the Deputy Secretary of the Office of Management”. No joke. DRAIN THE SWAMP.

Comments are closed.