Environment
Posted at 1:00pm on Apr. 4, 2008 When Ten Years is not a Trend
Nevermind That Data Behind the Curtain. Look at These Dire Predictions
By Mark I
The proponents of man-made Global Warming have been dealt another serious blow. The United Nations World Meteorological Organisation’s official forecast predicts that global temperatures will be cooler in 2008, again. If it is correct, this will be the tenth consecutive year that global temperatures have not increased. Temperatures stopped increasing in 1998, according to the allegedly impartial world body.
But the Secretary General of the organization, Michel Jarraud, says that the cooling does not constitute a challenge to Global Warming theory. Amazingly, he says that one must not take the evidence of ten straight years of decreasing temperatures as indicative of anything when it comes to the consensus view that Global Warming is real. Rather, he says, one must “look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming."
In other words, even when it’s cooling, it’s warming.
Read on…
Posted in Environment | Global Warming | Liberals | Miscellanea | radical environmentalists — Comments (65)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:30pm on Mar. 31, 2008 Turning Out the Lights on Freedom
The End Result of Earth Hour Thinking is Visible from Space
By Mark I
Did you turn out your lights on Saturday night between 8 and 9 PM to observe Earth Hour? If you didn’t, or if you were like me and turned extra lights on just to Fight the Power!, you exercised that most precious of rights and the one ingredient most essential to maintaining a free society: personal choice. But the peddlers of Earth Hour nonsense don’t want you to have that right. Not, at least, when it comes to lifestyle decisions that may impact on Global Warming.
Note that I use the original term, Global Warming, not the newly preferred moniker "climate change." Climate change only came about when it became clear that Global Warming wasn’t selling so well. I, for one, will not let the alarmists get away with moving the thermometers by changing the terms. But I digress.
If the environmental movement has its way, your betters in the Sierra Club, and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on [Global Warming] will dictate to you when you must turn off lights, what kind car or unreasonable facsimile of one you can drive, where you can live, what kind of job you can take, even how many children you can have. Does all that sound familiar? It does to me. In fact, there is one place I can think of where there is near 100% compliance with Earth Hour every night and where all of the above is already true.
Read on…
Posted in Earth Hour | Energy | Environment | Global Warming | Liberals | Miscellanea | radical environmentalists — Comments (15)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 11:12am on Jan. 31, 2008 Ethanol's Dirty Little Secret
By Vladimir
Even hard-core environmentalists are starting to acknowledge that there's nothing green about ethanol.
This is the folly of the so-called "Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007", which mandates 36 billion gallons of ethanol as a gasoline additive in 15 years (vs. 4.7 billion gallons in 2007). Pardon me for asking, but if our environment is already reeling from the impact of ethanol production, what happens when we make nearly eight times as much?
Ethanol Not Green or Clean, Some Charge
9 States Deemed Biggest Dead Zone Contributors
More overleaf...
Posted in Energy | Environment | Ethanol — Comments (78) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 2:03pm on Jan. 30, 2008 "Whoever said there's nothing new under the sun..." was probably right (but he's dead anyway)
By Jeff Emanuel
Remember the oil shortage in the 1970s, and the nationwide 55 mile per hour speed limit that resulted from it? Well, some environmentalists are agitating for a return to the old drive-55-arrive-alive days, and are pushing for a nationwide slowdown on the grounds that it will "reduce emissions by 15%."
According to Northwest Public Radio:
An old idea for saving gas is resurfacing as a response to global warming. Environmentalists in Washington State and California are lobbying to bring back the 55 mile-per-hour highway speed limit. Correspondent Tom Banse reports.
History buffs will recall we once had a nationwide 55 mile per hour speed limit. President Richard Nixon pushed for it in response to a 1973 oil crisis. It lasted until 1995.
According to Leavenworth, Washington environmentalist Pat Rasmussen, "reducing the speed limit from 70 to 55 would cut tailpipe emissions by about 15 percent."
Rasmussen says that she "now drives 55 voluntarily."
"I stay in the far right lane and I save a lot of gas and it doesn’t take that much more time," she told NWPR. Well, Ms. Rasmussen, it actually takes almost 30% more time to travel the same distance at 55 mph as at 70 mph. So, if you're only jetting across town -- driving, say, five miles or so -- then you're probably right; 5 minutes and 27 seconds isn't "that much more time" than 4 minutes and 17 seconds.
However, if you're actually going some distance, well...then I guess it depends on what your definition of "that much more time" is.
The state of Washington appears to have been more realistic about the issue here. According to NWPR:
The Washington governor’s climate change advisors recently considered lowering the speed limit. But the state traffic engineer worried about creating a new safety problem because some drivers won’t slow down. And the idea was dropped.
Regardless, I appreciate Ms. Rasumussen identifying herself as the driver that I and the rest of America hate driving behind or near more than just about anything in the world. I blame you, Pat, for just about every freeway wreck out there. Hope you're happy with your self-greening of the planet.
Posted in Economy | Enviro-Wackos | Environment | Speed Limit | There is Nothing New Under the Sun — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 2:20pm on Jan. 17, 2008 Two Quick Points on Energy
By Vladimir
1) When you move oil around the world in boats, you're going to spill some. If you spill some, you're probably going to spill a lot. Pipelines are what God intended to move oil around; pipeline spills are never very big (unless, of course, you're a centrally-planned government like the Soviet Union that cared not one whit for the environment, or economics, for that matter).
Posted in Energy | Environment | Pollution — Comments (11) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:05pm on Dec. 29, 2007 Prepare For Your Fluorescent Future Now! [UPDATED]
By Vladimir
Among the less-ballyhooed provisions of the Energy Bill of 2007 (you know the one - the bill that mandates 35 mpg SUV's, while saving both the economy and the planet in one fell swoop) is a plan to outlaw the incandescent light bulb, Thomas Edison's brainchild and the internationally-recognized symbol (at least in cartoons) of a Good Idea.
Congress Bans Incandescent Bulbs
Well, if this is what it takes to Stop Global Warming and Bring Saudi Arabia To Its Knees, count me in.
Of course, General Electric is all about saving the planet. What the heck, Compact Fluorescents pay for their extra cost in only 500 hours, so if there's an extra shekel or two to be made making CFL's, why not get on board? After all, the additional profits CFLs generate will help the same GE clean up PCB contamination, to the tune of several $billions, from the bottom of the Hudson River.
The reader should know, however, that the Compact Fluorescent Bulbs require just a tad of special handling for disposal or breakage. Each bulb contains just a skosh of mercury, you see.
The responsible consumer will want to print and keep handy a copy of the following CFL handling instructions, brought to you by the EPA, the same folks that gave us MTBE's in our gasoline (and in our drinking water):
Posted in Central Planning | Dim Bulbs | Energy | Environment — Comments (67) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:24pm on Dec. 13, 2007 Bush Blew Up Bali Climate Conference
So Sayeth the Goracle
By Mark I
"Environmental Champion and Nobel Laureate" Al Gore, as he was described on NPR News this morning flew from Oslo Norway (no doubt commercial), where he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, to Bali, Indonesia for an address to the U.N. climate change conference being held there. Gore’s speech likely raised sea levels by an inch or two for all the hot air he emitted.
The Green Goracle™, never one to miss a chance to blame the United States in general and George Bush in particular for just about anything, told the delegates that the U.S. was “principally responsible for obstructing progress here in Bali.” Gore might have done better to look toward his friends in the European Union and the global environmental movement when assigning blame. The United States at least wants to talk about real emissions reduction goals, while the rest of the world is paying lip service to standards they are not meeting.
UPDATE: The White House responds to Gore's Comments below the fold.
Read on…
Posted in Al Gore | Bali Conference | Environment | Global Warming | Kyoto | Liberals | The Goracle — Comments (10)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 5:51pm on Dec. 9, 2007 "Didya Ever Notice" Dept.: the South Korean Oil Spill
By Vladimir
Didya ever notice that every oil spill of consequence in the last 35 years has involved either a boat or a barge? Or in this case, both?
SKorean Oil Spill Washes Onto Coast: Witnesses
We need to move large volumes of oil around in boats because we are afraid to explore and develop domestic resources, where the production could be much more safely moved in pipelines. Pipelines are fixed in place and are less prone to human error than boats; if a pipeline leak does occur, it is controlled automatically, and the spilled volume is limited.
Posted in Energy | Environment | NIMBY — Comments (1) / Email this page » / Read More »
