Warmists Lie about the Paris Climate Agreement

from IBD:

For Climate-Change Hypocrites, U.S. Is Too Frackin’ Much

The tut-tutting and tsk-tsking about the U.S. withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement knows no end. But as yet another news story shows, the Paris deal is an utter fraud and should be considered as such.

As Francis Menton of the Manhattan Contrarian blog recently pointed out, a July 9 New York Times headline couldn’t hide the paper’s disgust and contempt for President Trump for once again telling the G20 group of nations that the U.S. would not fulfill President Obama’s unkeepable climate promises under the Paris accords.

“World Leaders Move Forward On Climate Change, Without U.S.,” the Times headline sneered. read more

I Never Thought I Would Say This, but I Love the EPA

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

Needless to say I was really disappointed at the roll out and outcome of the Republican ObamaCare “fix.” And I’m sure I’m not the only one. So much so, that I went in search of some good news.

Son of a gun if I didn’t find some. It’s doubly good because it not only benefits us and America, but is driving the left batty. And it’s one of my hot button issues. Wins all around!

The Huffington Post somberly posted an article yesterday entitled, “Donald Trump Is About To Undo Obama’s Legacy On Climate Change.” From the left’s point of view, the subtitle, “The White House plans to scrap a rule on power plant emissions, kneecapping U.S. participation in the Paris climate accord,” is equally sobering. Ain’t it grand!

It’s funny, but it seems that left to do the things he is able to on his own, President Trump already has a good track record. Things go off the rails when the establishment wing of Congress gets involved, like RINOCare.

Now I’m certainly not advocating for Trump usurping the Legislative branch like the last guy did – I’m just stating the obvious. read more

Tesla and the War on Coal

by: the Common Constitutionalist

You may have seen pictures of Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla Motors, playing amateur daredevil as he tried his hand at wing walking the other day. Yes, he’s happy-go-lucky, living high on the hog – his coffers full of government largess.

So dependent upon the government for its survival, Tesla’s 2014 annual report stated: “Our growth depends in part on the availability and amount of government subsidies and economic incentives.”

That’s a pretty bold and honest statement. Let me rephrase that. It’s a pretty bold statement, for to be honest, Musk’s company depends almost entirely on the generosity of us ignorant taxpayers, in one form or another.

They don’t sell many cars, and the money they do make is through a myriad of tax credits and other government giveaways. It’s a great scheme and the model for crony corporatism.

Tesla, by all estimates is a great car, but the company couldn’t survive a year in a real free-market. Yet they are evidently not content with their current method of fleecing the American public. read more

So This is a Feel Good Story?

By: the Common Constitutionalist 

I was looking around the internet for one or more feel good stories as we head into Christmas Eve. So I Googled “Feel Good Stories”. Several headings came up and I thought, okay, I have a lot to do – this will be easier than I thought to find at least one uplifting story to maybe elaborate on for the great newsfollowing day.

So, as we all do, I clicked on one the higher ranking results. The site I chose was entitled “Great News Network – Positive Feel Good News”. I again thought – Wow – this will be easy, anticipating such a story as a family reunited with a military parent or a dog who found his way home, just in time for Christmas, after being lost for 3 months. Maybe I’d find a feeding the hungry story, or even a Christmas miracle. You know, something like that.

What I actually found, advertised as feel good stories, were posts which caused me to literally laugh out loud as I stared at the screen. read more

Dirty Coal

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Elections have consequences. There will be many that surface due to the reelection of Barack Obama.

I’d like to speak of one; energy and more specifically, the coal industry.

111 US coal plants have already closed due to the Obama administrations EPA regulations. That’s a full fifth of all US coal plants so far.

An additional 200 plus coal plants are slated for closure within the next 3 to 5 years.

The coal plant closures represent between 31,000 and 36,000 MW of power lost. That’s the equivalent of shutting down the electricity supply for the entire state of Ohio.

In October president Obama signed yet another executive order setting a national goal, or better put, arbitrary mandate of 40 GW of new “Combined Heat and Power” (CHP) generation.

CHP captures waste heat and uses it to generate steam to run turbines and for manufacturing.

The administration claims that “Investment” in CHP could save around $100 billion in energy costs over 10 years.

Well, the president can certainly hang his hat on that kind of savings.

Once again it seems Obama is looking out for the folks. Getting rid of those dirty coal plants will actually save us money. That’s a win-win. Getting rid of those planet killing, fossil fuel emitting coal plants and saving money to boot. That is until one examines the numbers.

So we the people, through the intelligent policies of this president reap $100 billion in savings.

I wonder if there are any costs involved in the savings?

Why yes, there just happens to be. Once again the Obama administration will cost business.

Obama’s own White House estimates it will cost American manufacturing facilities between $40 and $80 billion to upgrade.

Okay, well that’s not too bad. That still leaves a savings of between $20 and $60 billion.

But wait, we are not done.

Another $70 to $180 billion will have to be spent on new power plants or further, and in my opinion, unnecessary pollution controls for existing plants.

So the wonderful and highly touted $100 billion savings will cost the private sector between $110 billion and $240 billion.

Aren’t mandates great?

And who do you suppose might have to pay for all these new items and upgrades? Why the consumer, of course.

Power companies will have to raise their rates to pay for all the new equipment and upgrades.

But hey, do we not recall what the president said several years ago? It’s not as if he was trying to hide anything when he stated that, “Electric rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

Oh, and did I mention jobs?

It is estimated that for every job in the coal industry about 3.5 jobs are created to service it. New coal regulations alone are expected to cost the U.S. an additional 1.4  to 1.5 million jobs.

So when you people who voted for Obama get laid off because of coal related regulations fear not, for at least you will be able to call the unemployment office on your new “Obama phone”.

Just Shut Them All Down

from:  of The Blaze:

Back in 1992, in his speech to the Republican National Convention, Pat Buchanan railed against the “environmental extremists who put birds and rats and insects ahead of families, workers, and jobs.”

This was widely seen as an unfair caricature of liberal environmental policy in 1992. In 2012, it’s practically a bloodless statement of fact.

The Obama administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has, in fact, been doing its best to validate this description, either through policy or highly revealing slips of the tongue. The most recent of the slips comes from EPA Region 1 Administrator Curt Spalding, who was captured in a video released by the office of Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) telling an audience at Yale University the following:

“But know right now, we are, we are struggling. We are struggling because we are trying to do our jobs. Lisa Jackson has put forth a very powerful message to the country. Just two days ago, the decision on greenhouse gas performance standard and saying basically gas plants are the performance standard which means if you want to build a coal plant you got a big problem. That was a huge decision. You can’t imagine how tough that was. Because you got to remember if you go to West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and all those places, you have coal communities who depend on coal. And to say that we just think those communities should just go away, we can’t do that. But she had to do what the law and policy suggested. And it’s painful. It’s painful every step of the way.”

Hear the comments from Spalding’s own mouth here:

To Spalding’s credit, he at least sounds regretful that the EPA (according to him) absolutely has to drive an entire industry into the ground for no apparent reason. Nevertheless, this video will do nothing to assuage the image of President Obama as an essentially anti-coal President who is using his EPA to try to strangle the industry – an image that has yielded political humiliation for the President in Appalachia, where coal is one of the leading sources of employment.

One almost feels sorry for President Obama’s sake that “birds and rats and insects” can’t vote…at least, not outside Chicago.

None of the Above

By: The Common Constitutionalist

 

Remember this from 2008?

Obama told us what he intended. Did we not hear him when he said he was ideologically opposed to coal? If we heard him, did we not believe him? Did we not believe he would actually find a way to shut down the coal industry? If we believed him, did we think we could stop him?

Well, it’s taken a few years but it is evident that he and his EPA are well on their way to fulfilling that 2008 promise. If unchecked, the EPA will successfully shut down many coal plants across this country, and yes, your electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket.

He was also quite clear about his intentions for “clean energy” generation. How has that worked out? Was no one listening to his words, knowing one at all?

Obama has stated on many occasions, he is in favor of the “all of the above” energy policy. This obviously is a crock. It is clear, at least to me, that he and his entire administration are anti-hydrocarbon.

The Washington Post reports that “the new proposed EPA rules will require any new power plant to emit no more than 1000 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt of electricity produced. The average US natural gas plant which emits 800 to 850 pounds of CO2 per megawatt, meets the current standard; coal plants however emit an average of 1768 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt.”

So, you say, at least we have the natural gas option. We’ve all heard there is more than enough natural gas in this country to power us for decades, if not centuries to come. Unfortunately the EPA has also begun blocking the use of hydraulic fracturing or fracking to get to the natural gas. And how long will it be before the EPA adjusts its standards to disallow natural gas plants?

So we have an administration that has begun to shut down the coal plants, won’t allow new ones to be built, won’t allow drilling for oil anywhere, and will not allow fracturing for production of natural gas. And please don’t buy the line of bull Obama is trying to sell, that domestic oil production is up. He is right that production is up from recent levels, but not due to any of his or his administration’s efforts. The oil production that has increased has all been on private land and has nothing to do with him. At present he has no authority to halt that drilling but his EPA has begun trying to slow the production of oil on these private lands. Congratulations! 

I guess we all should stock up on walking shoes and candles.

But hey, at least we’ll have a clean planet, because as we all know, the science of global warming is settled. It’s been proven, apparently, that man-caused CO2 emissions are causing global warming.

Wouldn’t it be weird, if some team of scientists discovered that man-made CO2 emissions don’t cause global warming?

Stay tuned.