Daily Archives: April 19, 2011

Bankers just lurv green scams

Carbon Regulation Default Swaps

The FT provides a small window into financial innovation related to carbon trading with an article describing a new financial product that is intended to allow carbon traders to hedge or even speculate against regulatory changes in the carbon market:

Kiln, a unit of Japan’s Tokio Marine that is one of the leading Lloyd’s of London underwriters, and specialist underwriter Parhelion, have jointly created a policy for an unnamed bank to insure its options on future Certified Emissions Reductions. The credits are issued under the Kyoto protocol to projects that cut greenhouse gases.

Underwriters hope the new policy will act as a safety net and encourage traders to remain active and provide liquidity.

The policy was designed for the bank in response to the move by the European Union’s Climate Change Committee to ban trading in credits earned from plants that destroyed two sources of greenhouse gases – HFC-23, a byproduct of refrigerant manufacturing, and adipic acid.

Julian Richardson, chief executive of Parhelion, said that while policy development under the Kyoto Clean Development Mechanism had settled down, EU policy on the Emissions Trading Scheme was a moveable feast and that this policy uncertainty was discouraging investors.

“Because this market exists purely through regulation, banks are faced with a lot of regulatory risk,” he said. “The EU decided only late last year that these two types of project no longer qualified.”

Hmmm … a new financial product that allows speculators to win and lose according to future governmental decisions in a market that exists only because of regulation.  Does any one else see some problems here?  A “moveable feast” indeed. (Roger Pielke Jr.)

Time to slay the ethanol monster

Are biofuel policies to help Mother Earth killing her most vulnerable children instead?
Posted on April 19, 2011 by Anthony Watts

Biofuel life cycle Image: LBL.gov

Guest post by Indur M. Goklany

I have a new paper — Could Biofuel Policies Increase Death and Disease in Developing Countries?  — which suggests that global warming policies may be helping kill more people than it saves. It was published last month in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.  Access to the paper is free. (WUWT)

Time To Kill Ethanol Subsidies

Big Government: If Washington is truly serious about cutting the nation’s mounting debt, there’s one way to show it: Eliminate the ridiculously expensive and wasteful ethanol subsidy.

Continue reading

Dubious Ipsos Mori poll

I have to wonder about the results of this poll – I just looked at the Australian results:

Very dubious. Energy supplies? Australia sits on massive resources of anthracite (high quality hard black coal) and lignite (brown coal) – enough to power the place for thousands of years even if we deploy coal to liquids to fuel the national transport fleet. Then there’s the prodigious supplies of natural gas, some of the world’s largest deposits of fissile materials… energy shortage only if we’re too damned lazy to extract it.

Then there’s the overpopulation thing – in a country that’s nearly empty (virtually only the Saudi Rub al Khali [Empty Quarter] and Antarctic have lower population densities) – it’s just that people cluster in Eastern capital cities where bizarre greenie-motivated zoning regulations restrict housing land availability and pack people in each others’ pockets. There’s no population problem here, just an administrative one.

Food shortages? There are more cattle in this country than people and 5 times as many sheep. We export grain by the tens of millions of tons and fruit and vegetables too… Gosh, whatever will we eat?

This seems to be one really dumb poll!

Continue reading

This rapid emission decline is a tragedy – emissions are actually a good proxy of economic activity and human well-being

Editorial: Don’t Look Now, But C02 Output Is Falling

Environment: Two years ago, greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. fell to their lowest levels since 1995. The list of reasons carbon dioxide emissions should not be regulated continues to grow.

The Environmental Protection Agency’s data show that emissions of what are considered the six main greenhouses gases fell 6.1% in 2009 from their 2008 levels.

Continue reading

Joe D’Aleo spanks ecocentric for not doing their homework

Global Warming Causing Tornadoes???? FACTS, not Feelings State Otherwise

I simply cant understand the lack of fact finding in this article

http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2011/04/18/tornadoes-climate-change-and-the-disaster-gap/

but I am going to “help” the author by showing him the facts, if he dares too look.

First of all, lets take a look at actual data on tornadoes

Notice how there were more tornadoes across the US when the climate was colder, the time of the cold PDO back in the 60s and 70s and it has been decreasing since the PDO has warmed… and amazingly since Jim Hansen set the world on Fire in 1988 with his doom and gloom prophecy, the numbers have trended down! The reason they are going up is because we are turning colder again. The last 2 big tornado springs have been after major la ninas and sharp drops in global temps. (Weather Bell)

States’ effort to find replacement for tobacco cash cow not going well and another attempt at Chevron extortion kicked

EDITORIAL: Supremes open to greenwashing
High court hears warming case that could freeze the U.S. economy

Global-warming alarmists have failed to make their case in the court of public opinion, so they’re taking their propaganda to the Supreme Court instead. Like many ideological movements that lack political traction, the left is hoping that what politicians have disposed of the judiciary will impose. (Washington Times)

High Court Voices Skepticism Over States’ Global Warming Suits
By Ashby Jones

Well, the early reports are coming in, and from the looks of it, April 19, 2011 might not turn out to be a good one for those hoping to use states’ “public nuisance” laws to combat the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.

Continue reading

Silent Spring, the reality:

Rachel Carson could be called the mother of modern environmentalism.

Her 1962 book ‘Silent Spring’ led to a worldwide ban of DDT.  Hippies like to gloss over the tens of millions of dead children the DDT ban doomed to die of malaria, but we’ve covered that tragedy before.

Carson was motivated to write Silent Spring by her concerns about man’s negative influence on nature – especially birdlife:

…in 1958, Carson’s interest in writing about the dangers of DDT was rekindled when she received a letter from a friend in Massachusetts bemoaning the large bird kills which had occured on Cape Cod as the result of DDT sprayings.

…Carson concluded that DDT and other pesticides had irrevocably harmed birds and animals and had contaminated the entire world food supply.

Nearly 50 years after the publication of Silent Spring and birds are dropping like, err, flies.   Except the mass slaughter of birds is by wind farms, the preferred alternative (to) energy choice of today’s environmentalist, not a maligned pesticide: (Daily Bayonet)

Do the environment a real favor and scrap everything “environmental”, beginning with camapigners

Environmental campaigners angry as green laws labelled as red tape
All of Britain’s 278 environment laws under review, including National Park, Clean Air and Climate Change Acts

Environmental campaigners have condemned the coalition’s inclusion of all of Britain’s 278 environmental laws in a list of “red tape” regulations considered by the public for the axe.

The Wildlife and Countryside Act, National Park Act, Clean Air Act and the Climate Change Act are among the packages of environmental safeguards included in the “red tape challenge” – a crowdsourcing exercise launched by the government to establish which regulations restrict business in the UK.

All of the UK’s more than 21,000 pieces of regulation are included on the government’s website for an evaluation. Users are told only the issues of tax and national security are exempted. Participants are assured the “onus” will be on ministers to make the case for keeping a regulation recommended for cutting.

The inclusion of environmental legislation has alarmed green groups. John Sauven, director of Greenpeace, said: “We don’t yet know if this is cock-up or conspiracy. If it’s a cock-up, David Cameron needs to come out and say the Climate Change Act, central to the push for a clean technology revolution, is safe from the axe. But if ministers are serious about scrapping it and other vital environmental regulations then we’ll be looking at something akin to the worst excesses of the Bush-Cheney White House. When did clean air and green jobs become a burden?”

Environmental campaigners also expressed alarm that the authors of the website suggested the government no longer thought issues of climate change to be of national security. In 2009, William Hague, then shadow foreign secretary, said climate change was “not simply an environmental and developmental concern but an urgent foreign and national security concern”.

A source from the business department said the exercise was not simply an audit of which regulations should be cut. Rather, it was an attempt to find out the public sentiment and ideas on all red tape, for better or worse. Their responsibility was to business as much as to those concerned about the environment, the source added. (Guardian)