Filed under: Economy, Environment, Global Warming, Junk Science, Science/Technology | Tags: No Reduction in Global Temperature, The Power of Big Government, The Triumph of Junk Science
Try to estimate all those policies and programs that our government at all levels has put in place to reduce global temperature so that we don’t suffer from the depredations of global warming or, if you will, global climate disruption. We have national policies, state policies, county policies and city policies. There are a lot, and the cheerleader-in-chief is the Environmental Protection Agency.
Obama said, when he secured the nomination, that “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” And he said “The science is beyond dispute. The facts are clear. Sea levels are rising. Coastlines are shrinking. We see record drought, spreading famine, storms that are growing stronger each passing hurricane season (Nov. 17, 2008).
But then Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, geologist, physicist, one-time expert reviewer for the IPCC, and one of the greatest — if not the greatest— experts on sea levels in the world today announced at the end of February this year, that contrary to IPCC claims, sea levels are not rising. He has worked with sea level problems for 40 years in areas all across the world. But of course the world did not break out in celebration that a big worry was removed. Why doesn’t anyone celebrate?
Tough new rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency restricting greenhouse gas emissions would reduce the global mean temperature by only 0.006 to 0.0015 of a degree Celsius by the year 2100, according to the EPA’s analysis.
As a side effect, these rules would “slow construction nationwide for years.”
Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee issued a report last week. It said that a series of proposed and partially implemented new regulations on industrial boilers, greenhouse gas emitters, and ozone levels will put over 800,000 jobs at risk with little or no environmental benefit. The Obama administration just can’t stop destroying jobs.
The report’s authors quote the EPA staff to show that greenhouse gas regulations which would require major sources of CO2 to obtain permits and limit their output, could seriously harm the economy if put into place.
The EPA issued a ‘finding’ last Spring that carbon dioxide is a danger to public health, so the EPA is able to regulate automobiles and trucks, but in effect stationary emitters — factories, schools, office buildings — are now subject to those Clean Air Regulations as well. Please explain to me just how what you exhale can possibly be a danger to public health. Do we all have to stop exhaling indoors? Can we no longer exhale in a closed situation, like a car?
The benefit of regulating those sources adds up to, by the EPA’s own estimates, as little as less than two thousandths of a degree in temperature reduction in over a century. This is absurd. All this regulation and rules and policies, and all those employees at the EPA who are churning our this nonsense are accomplishing nothing, nothing at all.
That should make it fairly clear that the purposes of the EPA have nothing much to do with reducing global warming, and have some other ideology as their motivating factor. Any ideas?
[Pictures of smokestacks are used to say "pollution", yet it's usually just steam].
1 Comment so far
Leave a comment