Cross posted from Green Hell Blog:
Activists love to talk about the hypothetical far-future “health risks” of a less-cold planet. They are not so keen to discuss the very real harms caused by their hysterical anti-carbon claims here and now. We at JunkScience.com are not so reticent.
“Scientists” Pull a Snow Job on Reporters in Teleconference
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, AMS Fellow
As we reported, the eco-pressure group, the Union of Concerned Scientists, as part of a continuing misinformation campaign sponsored a teleconference yesterday with a very confused Jeff Masters of Weather Underground, opportunist Mark Serreze of NSIDC and a UCS environmentalist. Their performance was a scientific disappointment to say the least as one scientist wrote me “Masters lost all my respect. Serreze never had it”. He didn’t mention the UCS. It is the crazy uncle no one talks about.
Because people wrote to ask why we don’t feature them any more — our bad, we’ve just been a little preoccupied of late but here you go:
Mid-Holocene Coral Mortality in the South China Sea: What does it imply about the current state of earth’s corals?
At today’s House Energy and Power Subcommittee hearing on EPA’s job killing greenhouse gas regulations, Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) asked panel witness Gina McCarthy — chief of EPA’s air programs, including the agency’s greenhouse gas regulations — whether she had any idea of what the atmospheric level of carbon dioxide is, SHE ADMITTED THAT SHE DID NOT!
From Corporate Energy Subsidies: Our current renewable energy subsidy path … [has] yielded only entitlement-dependency, says Larry Bell, Forbes.
In a damning critique of clean energy mandates Bell states
Our current renewable energy subsidy path (including tax credits, grants, mandated purchases and government loan guarantees) has proved to be unsustainable for a variety of reasons. For example, it has diverted private investments from viable to uncompetitive enterprises; created a welfare program for politically favored industries; distorted and disrupted proven free market structures; continuously rewarded repetitive failures; imposed unwarranted and involuntary cost burdens upon all energy consumers and taxpayers; and extended unprecedented government regulatory intrusions into our businesses and private lives.
Going on to cite Steve Hargreaves
… renewable energy subsidies including industry tax credits and direct grants cost the U.S. government (U.S. taxpayers) about $11 billion last year. That included approximately $5 billion for electrical solar and wind power and $6 billion for ethanol. Yet while originally intended to jump-start those industries, these handouts and other charities have yielded only entitlement-dependency.
Read the whole thing to see some of the staggering cost of corporate energy subsidies – and how, like Oliver, non-producing dependents say “Please Sir, I want some more”.
Last week Breakthrough co-founders Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus returned to Yale University for a retrospective on their seminal 2004 essay, “The Death of Environmentalism.” In their speech they argued that the critical work of rethinking green politics was cut short by fantasies about green jobs and “An Inconvenient Truth.” The latter backfired — more Americans started to believe news of global warming was being exaggerated after the movie came out — the former made false promises that could not be realized by cap and trade. What is an earnest green who cares about global warming to do now? In this speech, Nordhaus and Shellenberger reflect on what went so badly awry, and offer 12 Theses for a post-environmental approach to climate change.
via The Breakthrough Institute: The Long Death of Environmentalism.
By Peter C Glover
What is it about most far left (and some far right) ‘hit’ groups? They seem to possess an almost congenital inability to remain focused on the issues and facts without resorting to ad hominem attacks, personal and motivational.
Having taken part in public square debates on numerous issues, I quickly grasped that, for many on the far liberal-left, Kant’s postmodern “subjectivity is truth” philosophy has become a way of thinking, a way of life. Thus the whole concept of absolute truth or hard facts doesn’t come easy. Best avoided then – allowing any verbal curmudgeon into the armoury in pursuit of an ideological agenda, regardless of facts.
Take Canada’s well-funded toxic campaigners DeSmogBlog. But first, let’s look at DeSmog in action in a recent attack on the oil and gas industry funded PR outfit Energy In Depth (EID).
via Energy Tribune- DeSmog, DeBunked.
By Andrew Restuccia – 03/01/11 02:11 PM ET
Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee agreed Tuesday to hold a hearing next week on climate science at the request of top Democrats on the panel.
Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.), chairman of the panel’s Energy and Power subcommittee, said he would schedule a hearing next Tuesday on two new studies that link climate change to severe weather.
via House GOP agrees to hold climate-science hearing at request of Democrats – The Hill’s E2-Wire.
Hopefully they’ll think to invite one or both of the Professors Pielke, honest brokers who can point out the science most assuredly does not support assertions “global warming” is causing more frequent or more powerful storms. Perhaps Dr Ryan Maue would be another good choice. Feel free to leave your suggestions in the comments.
China Sets Out Disputes Facing “Arduous” Climate Talks
China, the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitter, wants rich nations to vow bigger cuts to emissions as part of a new international deal on fighting global warming, Beijing’s top climate negotiator said on Tuesday.
The negotiator, Xie Zhenhua, said he expects “arduous” wrangling about that and other issues facing governments seeking to settle on the key parts of a comprehensive climate change pact at talks in Durban, South Africa, in late 2011.
Above all, Xie said in a policy-setting essay in China’s official People’s Daily, Beijing will not budge from demanding a second lease of life for the Kyoto Protocol, the greenhouse gas emissions pact which Japan, Russia, Canada and other critics have said does too little to curb the fast-growing emissions of China and other big developing countries.
via World Environment News – China Sets Out Disputes Facing “Arduous” Climate Talks – Planet Ark.
Carbon trading firms remain optimistic about a European market, after a 50 million euros cyberattack, but have given up hope on a U.S. cap and trade scheme, they told an industry conference on Tuesday.
Perhaps indicative of the problems facing carbon markets, attendance was well down on previous years at the Point Carbon conference, at nearly 800, compared with 1,700 in 2008.
The reputation of carbon markets has faced headwinds following the hacking in January of electronic emissions permits from a European scheme, the hub of global trade, as well as dimming expectations of a federal U.S. market.
In addition, hopes are fading that the world will agree on an extension after 2012 to the Kyoto Protocol, which sets binding emissions targets for industrialized nations and so drives demand for international carbon offsets.
via World Environment News – Carbon Market Puts Brave Face On Headwinds – Planet Ark.
By Andrew Restuccia – 03/01/11 05:54 PM ET
Key House Republicans expect to officially introduce a bill in the next week that would permanently block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions.
Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.), a co-author of the legislation, said Tuesday that he expects to have Democrats sign on to the bill as co-sponsors.
via House Republicans expect Dem backing for plan to kill climate rules – The Hill’s E2-Wire.
‘New delay’ for Mongstad CCS
A final investment decision on a full-scale carbon capture facility at Statoil’s Mongstad oil refinery in western Norway reportedly could be delayed for another two years pending an investigation into the possible health risks.
… There are suspicions that amine-based technology used to separate carbon dioxide from flue gas can produce emissions that can cause cancer, but more time is needed for research to assess the potential health and environmental risks.
via ‘New delay’ for Mongstad CCS – Upstream Online.
That and the fact that it isn’t worth doing to begin with.
Terence Corcoran: Come Clean’s messy jobs reality
There’s little doubt that green jobs come at a higher cost in jobs lost in other sectors of the economy
The job-killing consequences of massive government spending and regulation to force green energy development have yet to sink in with voters. But they might soon, which is why a cabal of environmental activists and subsidy-seeking industries have formed a new propaganda organization in Ontario called Come Clean. Continue reading
Bjorn Lomborg From: The Australian March 02, 2011
POLITICAL rhetoric has shifted from the need to respond to the “generational challenge” of climate change.
Investment in alternative energy technologies such as solar and wind is no longer peddled on environmental grounds. Instead we are being told of the purported economic payoffs, above all the promise of so-called “green jobs”. Unfortunately, that does not measure up to economic reality.
The Copenhagen Consensus Centre asked Gurcan Gulen, a senior energy economist at the Centre for Energy Economics, Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin, to assess the “state of the science” in defining, measuring and predicting the creation of green jobs.
Gulen concluded job creation “cannot be defended as another benefit” of well-meaning green policies. In fact, the number of jobs these policies create is likely to be offset – or worse – by the number of jobs they destroy.
via No windfall in false promise of green jobs | The Australian.