EPA’s Mission Leap
Regulation: What does the Environmental Protection Agency say it needs to fully implement new greenhouse gas emissions rules? How about an army of 230,000 new bureaucrats and an additional $21 billion a year?
The EPA itself is an example of shameless mission creep. Its 2010 budget was 29 times higher than its first budgets were in the early 1970s when it was established by President Nixon. The agency’s workforce has grown from about 4,000 to roughly 19,000.
In just over four decades, the EPA has federalized local environmental problems and became involved in “anxiety and nutrition,” social and economic issues, and aging. Now it wants to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, a charge it was never granted by Congress. Adding 230,000 new workers and spending an extra $21 billion a year simply sounds like business as usual. (IBD)
- Should you care? No
- Does this indicate anything other than a cold Northern winter? No
- Is the “ozone layer” stable at any time? No (see “That ‘ozone depletion’ thing“
- Do fluctuating stratospheric ozone levels indicate “loss”? No
- Is this of any significance to humanity or the environment whatsoever? No
- Is this just another “People bad, industry bad, chemicals bad” scam from misanthropes and would-be controllers of everything? You betcha!
NASA Leads Study Of Unprecedented Arctic Ozone Loss
WASHINGTON — A NASA-led study has documented an unprecedented depletion of Earth’s protective ozone layer above the Arctic last winter and spring caused by an unusually prolonged period of extremely low temperatures in the stratosphere.
The study, published online Sunday in the journal Nature, finds the amount of ozone destroyed in the Arctic in 2011 was comparable to that seen in some years in the Antarctic, where an ozone “hole” has formed each spring since the mid 1980s. The stratospheric ozone layer, extending from about 10 to 20 miles (15 to 35 kilometers) above the surface, protects life on Earth from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays.
The Antarctic ozone hole forms when extremely cold conditions, common in the winter Antarctic stratosphere, trigger reactions that convert atmospheric chlorine from human-produced chemicals into forms that destroy ozone. The same ozone-loss processes occur each winter in the Arctic. However, the generally warmer stratospheric conditions there limit the area affected and the time frame during which the chemical reactions occur, resulting in far less ozone loss in most years in the Arctic than in the Antarctic. (NASA News)
Posted in Activists, Chemophobia, Enviros, EPA, Green scams, Misanthropy, Ozone, Propaganda, Regulation, Silly scares, UN
EPA Rules … and how they don’t follow their own
Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Most folks would not be surprised if I were to make the claim that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not properly consider the science when it issued its “Endangerment Finding” saying that CO2 was a pollutant and a danger to humanity. It is that scientifically unsupported finding that allows them to regulate CO2. (WUWT)
Flashback: Steve McIntyre on EPA Endangerment Finding
Green Panic: Brussels Desperate To Block Shale Revolution
Thursday, 29 September 2011 07:32 Nick Grealy, No Hot Air
Some people will be leaping on this story:
BRUSSELS—Oversights in REACH registration dossiers could mean the use of hazardous chemicals in hydraulic fracturing to extract shale gas is technically illegal in the European Union, the European Commission told BNA Sept. 27.
Commission environment spokesman Joe Hennon said the Helsinki-based European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) had examined REACH registration dossiers “for a selected number of chemical substances having a high probability to be used in shale gas operations,” and had found no instances of chemical safety assessments mentioning exposure scenarios related to hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking.
We can see the headlines: Frackers use illegal chemicals. Of course this is simply an over eager group of pedants, whose priority may be as more to self-preservation than public protection. Let’s look at the case of one of the chemicals Cuadrilla Resources uses in the UK: (GWPF)
Noon’s Rebuttal: Environmental Law is Upside-down
Thanks to Michael Economides and The Energy Tribune for giving coverage to the practice of professional environmentalism in America.
The debate between the Center for Biological Diversity and me stems from an issue gaining increasing attention. Most recently, on September 28, according to an Associated Press article, the EPA cut corners. Referencing a report from the Environmental Protection Agency’s inspector general, the article states the “EPA should have followed a more extensive review process.” Inspector General Arthur A. Elkins, Jr said: “It is clear that EPA did not follow all the required steps.” Earlier this month, the Washington Examiner revealed a similar scandal: U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger “ripped” two Fish and Wildlife scientists for their “biological opinion” that was “arbitrary, capricious and unlawful.” Likewise, I drew attention to science behind the proposed endangered species listing for the Sand Dune Lizard. The CBD took offense. Instead of defending the science, they have opted to attack me.
How’d we get here? (Energy Tribune)
EPA’s CO2 Regulations are What’s “Comically Wrong”
The Environmental Protection Agency called a Daily Caller report “comically wrong” this morning. That is an interesting analysis given that the EPA’s hideously bad global warming regulations are more of a joke than actual regulatory structure. Either way, the fun and games will soon end when Americans are paying higher energy prices and businesses are shedding jobs as a result of these “comically wrong” regulations. (The Foundry)
Weird science: EPA Inspector General calls greenhouse-gas regulatory process flawed
In response to a report that could lead to questions about the credibility of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) , Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe, ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, is calling for hearings to investigate. The report — from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the EPA — reveals that the scientific basis, on which the administration’s endangerment finding for greenhouse gases hinged, violated the EPA’s own peer review procedure. (Daily Caller)
EPA IG Finds Serious Flaws in Centerpiece of Obama Global Warming Agenda
Posted in Activists, Cap and tax, Climate change, Crazy carbon schemes, Dioxycarbophobia, Enviros, Green scams, IPCC, Misanthropy, PlayStation® climatology, Propaganda, Regulation
EU ban on bracken pesticide is blasted
A EUROPEAN Union ban on a pesticide to control bracken has been criticised by leading conservation charities.
Millions of pounds has been spent removing bracken from the Lake District fells because it is a haven for disease carrying ticks, which can spread Lyme disease to humans and Louping Ill to grouse and sheep.
Bracken has spread significantly during recent years sometimes at the expense of other plants and wildlife.
The most effective weapon against it has been a pesticide called Asulam, which targets just the bracken, leaving other vegetation free to grow.
It has been used for decades, but was banned by the EU’s Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health over concerns about its safety when used on spinach and other food crops. The EU has been re-registering pesticides to adhere to higher food standards, and Asulam failed in one of the tests. (Westmorland gazette)
EPA Boosts Water Policing as Farmers Say Worst Fears Realized
Fifth-generation farmer Kenny Watkins ran afoul of the U.S. clean-water police in 2009. His infraction: Planting hay in a pasture.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ordered Watkins to stop cultivating a 160-acre (65-hectare) tract in central California because he might destroy seasonal ponds and harm the San Joaquin River. Watkins has defied the decision and the federal government’s control over what he can grow on his farm.
Green Math, Part 5: Green policies and energy prices
The Guardian’s Leo Hickman ponders a deep question:
Are green policies good or bad news for energy bills?
Hickman wonders if there could possibly be a connection between green taxes and rising energy bills in the UK, a topic that is quickly becoming a political liability for the Prime Minister and his lunatic Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change.
There should be no surprise energy costs are higher. After all, that was the whole point of green policies:
Who knew that paying up to twenty times the market rate for wind and solar-power might lead to an increase in utility bills? If only someone could have foreseen the havoc that would be wrought by the green dream.
Oh, wait. Everyone did:
In fact, warmists got exactly what they wanted, green energy subsidized by taxes and fees levied against fossil-fueled generation. What greens don’t want is any blame for the resulting hikes in energy bills.
Too bad. Own it, hippies. (Daily Bayonet)
Inside the EPA
Memos show that even other regulators worry about its rule-making.
The Environmental Protection Agency claims that the critics of its campaign to remake U.S. electricity are partisans, but it turns out that they include other regulators and even some in the Obama Administration. In particular, a trove of documents uncovered by Congressional investigators reveals that these internal critics think the EPA is undermining the security and reliability of the U.S. electric power supply.
With its unprecedented wave of rules, the EPA is abusing traditional air-quality laws to force a large share of the coal-fired fleet to shut down. Amid these sacrifices on the anticarbon altar, Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski and several House committees have been asking, well, what happens after as much as 8% of U.S. generating capacity is taken off the grid? (WSJ)
EPA: Regulations would require 230,000 new employees, $21 billion
Environment, ‘Justice’, ‘Fairness’
Apologies for this very long post — things which I felt needed to be said kept occurring to me…
Mike Childs is Head of Climate at the Friends of the Earth, and Chair of FoE Europe. He writes in a blog post at the FoE site today that,
One of the reasons I joined Friends of the Earth over 20 years ago was that it was an environmental group with a strong record of joining up social justice, development and environmental issues. This position has been maintained through the years.
I like the ambiguity of the language. ‘Joining up social justice, development and environmental issues’ doesn’t mean a commitment to ‘social justice and development’. Rather, it means subordinating them to ‘environmental issues’. This has been discussed previously on this blog. One-time ‘development’ agencies such as Oxfam, for instance, have abandoned their emphasis on development, to emphasise instead that ‘pastoral society’ is the best way of life for people in the developing world. It’s ‘sustainable’, you see, whereas life in industrialised, democratic, and wealthy economies — where we’ve moved on from such proximity to nature — isn’t. Never mind what people actually want, the influential, well-funded and ethically-unimpeachable NGO ‘joins up’ the notion of ‘social justice’, ‘development’, and ‘environmental issues’, and decides for them what’s in their best interests. Instead of talking about poverty and the need for development, Oxfam now are concerned with ‘climate poverty’ and are opposed to development. (Climate Resistance)
ManBearPig, Climategate and Watermelons: A conversation with author James Delingpole
James Delingpole is a bestselling British author and blogger who helped expose the Climategate scandal back in 2009. Reason.tv caught up with Delingpole in Los Angeles recently to learn more about his entertaining and provocative new book Watermelons: The Green Movement’s True Colors. At its very roots, argues Delingpole, climate change is an ideological battle, not a scientific one. In other words, it’s green on the outside and red on the inside. At the end of the day, according to Delingpole, the “watermelons” of the modern environmental movement do not want to save the world. They want to rule it.
Approximately 10 minutes.
Produced by Paul Feine and Alex Manning.
Go to http://reason.tv for downloadable versions, and subscribe to our YouTube Channel to receive notifications when new material goes live. (Reason TV)
Monday, 26 September 2011 08:56 JR Dunn, The American Thinker
The long, green collapse has only begun.
There’s something satisfyingly symbolic about the unfolding Solyndra scandal. A government “investment” based on a totally spurious Green rationale collapses, threatening to take part of the administration with it. What more apt illustration of the current status of environmentalism? It could scarcely go better if you’d scripted it.
Call for an Open Debate on Climate Science.
Winston Churchill said,
“It has been said that Democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”
Free Speech is central to the maintenance of Democracy, as the US Founding Fathers recognized by enshrining it as the First Amendment, which says in part,
“Congress shall make no law…abridging freedom of speech.”
Americans must cherish and defend their freedom of speech at all costs.
Global warming and subsequently climate change were transport vehicles for a political ideology to replace free market capitalism by claiming it’s byproduct, CO2, was exhausting world resources and destroying the planet. This was an extension of the Malthusian idea adapted by the Club of Rome in the 1960s that it accelerated the overpopulation problem and endangered all resources, not just food supply.
It also became part of the new larger vehicle, the paradigm shift created by environmentalism. The combination gave proponents of the hypothesis that human CO2 was causing global warming and climate change the moral high ground. They joined a few environmentalists who already claimed only they cared about the environment. It’s an arrogant outrage because we all care about the environment, but the outrage is amplified as the environmentalists use the environmental issue to push a political agenda. (Tim Ball)
Unfortunately there seem to be a number of translation errors in this piece as PlayStation® climatology and propaganda is confused with actual science but bear with it, it’s interesting to see the growing desperation of the UN propagandists.
EU climate chief ‘shocked’ at US debate
By Ben Geman
European Union climate chief Connie Hedegaard is disposing of diplomatic niceties when describing U.S. political battles over climate change.
“I’m shocked that the political debate in the U.S. is so far away from the scientific facts,” she said, according to The Copenhagen Post.
“When more than 90 percent of researchers in the field are saying that we have to take [climate change] seriously, it is incredibly irresponsible to ignore it. It’s hard for a European to understand how it has become so fashionable to be anti-science in the U.S.,” Hedegaard said in the Post account, which reprints comments she made to the Danish paper Politiken.
“And when you hear American presidential candidates denying climate change, it’s difficult to take,” she said. (E2 Wire)