Bruddah IZ
DA
Has so little ever been said....
Climate and Weather
- Thread starter espola
- Start date
First YOU must return ALL the STOLEN Golf Balls and then
admit you are a LIAR.
That's not very hard to accomplish.
Hüsker Dü
DA
That opinion is as relevant as yours poser.
Hüsker Dü
DA
Truth stings a bit eh?
Bruddah IZ
DA
You’ll be okay.
I think its spelled. "ow".
I agree.
Sheriff Joe
DA
OPINION
What a POS obama is.
Getting to the Bottom of EPA Climate Fraud
Paul Driessen | May 18, 2019
In December 2009, the Obama Environmental Protection Agency issued its Endangerment Finding (EF) – decreeing that carbon dioxide (CO2) and other “greenhouse gases” (GHGs) endanger the health and welfare of Americans. In the process, EPA ignored the incredible economic, health and welfare benefits of fossil fuels – and the fact that (even at just 0.04% of the atmosphere) carbon dioxide is the miracle molecule that enables plants to grow and makes nearly all live on Earth possible.
EPA turned CO2 into a “dangerous pollutant” and ruled that fossil fuels must be eradicated. The agency subsequently used its EF to justify tens of billions of dollars in climate research, anti-fossil fuel regulations, and wind and solar subsidies; President Obama’s signing of the Paris climate treaty; and proposals to spend trillions of dollars a year on Green New Deal (GND) programs.
And yet, despite multiple demands that this be done, there has never been any formal, public review of the EF conclusion or of the secretive process EPA employed to ensure the result of its “analysis” could only be “endangerment” – and no awkward questions or public hearings would get in the way.
Review, transparency and accountability may finally be on the way, however, in the form of potential Executive Branch actions. If they occur – and they certainly should – both are likely to find that there is no valid scientific basis for the EF, and EPA violated important federal procedural rules in rendering its predetermined EF outcome. (One could even say the EF was obtained primarily because of prosecutorial misconduct, a kangaroo court proceeding, and scientific fraud.) Failure to examine and reverse the EF would mean it hangs like Damocles’ sword over the USA, awaiting the next climate-focused president.
To the consternation and outrage of climate alarmists, keep-fossil-fuels-in-the-ground radicals, and predictable politicians and pundits, President Trump may soon appoint a Presidential Committee on Climate Change, to review “dangerous manmade climate change” reports by federal agencies.
Meanwhile, the Competitive Enterprise Institute has filed a formal petition with EPA, asking that the agency stop utilizing and relying on the EF – and instead subject the finding to a proper “high level” peer review, as required by the Information Quality Act. The reasoning presented in CEI’s succinct and persuasive petition is compelling. Its main points are these.
* EPA’s Endangerment Finding and the Technical Support Document (TSD) that supposedly justifies it did not meet Information Quality Act (IQA) requirements for how the work should have been done.
* The agency’s evaluation of the then-current climate change and related science was clearly a “highly influential scientific assessment” (HISA), which triggered important IQA and OMB rules governing rulemakings that have “a potential impact of more than $500 million in any year” … or present “novel, controversial or precedent-setting” changes … or would likely raise “significant interagency interest.”
* EPA’s “Clean Power Plan” to shut down coal-fired power plants alone would cost $2.5 billion in annual compliance costs, EPA admitted. Its motor vehicle rules would cost tens of billions. The Paris agreement and GND would add trillions per year in costs to the US economy. All are based on the EF. And all were certainly controversial and generated significant interest by multiple other government agencies.
* EPA deliberately downplayed the significance of its review and decision, ignored the IQA and OMB requirements, and refused to allow citizens, independent energy, climate and health experts, or even scientific and professional societies to nominate potential reviewers or participate in the EF analysis.
Hüsker Dü
DA
Is that more Reddit white nationalist lite speak?
Sheriff Joe
DA
Ain't California Great?
Bad air days on the rise: The nation's most polluted city is ...
DOYLE RICE | USA TODAY | 1:51 pm EDT April 24, 2019
See which other U.S. cities were named in the American Lung Association 'State of the Air' report.
USA TODAY
California's reign as the U.S. state with the worst air pollution continues as Los Angeles is again the nation's smoggiest metro area, according to a report released Wednesday.
Bad air days on the rise: The nation's most polluted city is ...
DOYLE RICE | USA TODAY | 1:51 pm EDT April 24, 2019
See which other U.S. cities were named in the American Lung Association 'State of the Air' report.
USA TODAY
California's reign as the U.S. state with the worst air pollution continues as Los Angeles is again the nation's smoggiest metro area, according to a report released Wednesday.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Air pollution: Smog, soot is worst in California
USA Today
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...AxAB&usg=AOvVaw2MH8wwJPlH_MEXv6sqF2u-&cf=1
USA Today
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...AxAB&usg=AOvVaw2MH8wwJPlH_MEXv6sqF2u-&cf=1
Bruddah IZ
DA
https://www.google.com/amp/s/judithcurry.com/2019/04/20/energy-security-and-grid-resilience/amp/
Energy security is a huge deal, it is hard to argue that this is not a more important near-term priority than emissions reductions to prevent future climate change. The smart way to approach this whole issue is climate-informed energy security.
Energy security actually provides a better argument for wind and solar power in a diverse energy portfolio than reducing CO2 emissions, since wind and solar don’t depend on water resources (unlike hydro plus nuclear and fossil fuel generation that require water for cooling). Wind and solar power are sensitive to different types of bad weather (e.g. icing, snowfall, clouds, too much or too little wind).
Thinking that projected climate change should determine energy policy, without careful consideration to energy security, reliability, economy and broader environmental impacts, has the potential to increase societal vulnerability to whatever weather/climate extremes might throw at us and reduce overall well being—. Judith Curry responding to Ret. Admiral Gunns presentation on grid resiliency in link above response.
Energy security is a huge deal, it is hard to argue that this is not a more important near-term priority than emissions reductions to prevent future climate change. The smart way to approach this whole issue is climate-informed energy security.
Energy security actually provides a better argument for wind and solar power in a diverse energy portfolio than reducing CO2 emissions, since wind and solar don’t depend on water resources (unlike hydro plus nuclear and fossil fuel generation that require water for cooling). Wind and solar power are sensitive to different types of bad weather (e.g. icing, snowfall, clouds, too much or too little wind).
Thinking that projected climate change should determine energy policy, without careful consideration to energy security, reliability, economy and broader environmental impacts, has the potential to increase societal vulnerability to whatever weather/climate extremes might throw at us and reduce overall well being—. Judith Curry responding to Ret. Admiral Gunns presentation on grid resiliency in link above response.
Bruddah IZ
DA
5th largest economy in the world.Ain't California Great?
Bad air days on the rise: The nation's most polluted city is ...
DOYLE RICE | USA TODAY | 1:51 pm EDT April 24, 2019
See which other U.S. cities were named in the American Lung Association 'State of the Air' report.
USA TODAY
California's reign as the U.S. state with the worst air pollution continues as Los Angeles is again the nation's smoggiest metro area, according to a report released Wednesday.
Bruddah IZ
DA
It’s your fear speak.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Climate change could raise sea levels by 7 feet by 2100: study
https://www.foxnews.com/science/climate-change-sea-levels-rise
https://www.foxnews.com/science/climate-change-sea-levels-rise
I think Ricky needs to check the data. He and dumbshit IZ have their own science on the issue. It's all "alarmist," remember.
That lefty commie rag "Fox News" is not to be trusted.
The train just left the Carpinteria Amtrak station a few minutes ago. The sign said "Elevation 7 Feet".
Nebulously connected -- I set the alarm in my cellphone to wake me at 5:15 so I wouldn't miss my train. A little later I tried to cancel that setting. I think I ended up setting the alarm for 4 different times tomorrow.