Climate and Weather
- Thread starter espola
- Start date
Sheriff Joe
DA
Trump just killed another Obama-era government climate program. Critics call it a ‘grave mistake.’
4 hours
The Trump administration quietly scrapped another Obama-era climate initiative last week. One critic called the move a "grave mistake." (Scott Barbour/Getty Images)
135 Follow
Chris EnloeWeekend Editor
Article GoalInform
President Donald Trump’s administration recently quietly killed an Obama-era NASA program that tracked gases environmentalists believe contribute to man-made climate change.
Science magazine first reported the news last week.
Special: First-Look: Expert who predicted Bitcoin $20K says 2018 may be even bigger
What are the details?
The NASA program, known as the Carbon Monitoring System, measured carbon dioxide and methane gases in the atmosphere and tracked the planet’s flow of carbon, creating high-resolution models for scientists.
Carbon dioxide and methane are two so-called greenhouse gases that scientists believe contribute to global warming.
According to Science, the program cost taxpayers $10 million to operate each year. It was established in 2010.
Why was the program cut?
It’s not immediately clear why the administration scrapped the project. According to Science, the move is related to the White House’s continued “broad attack on climate science.”
Meanwhile, Kelly Sims Gallagher, a professor at Tufts University, told Science the move is related to Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change because the CMS project was helping other countries measure their greenhouse gas emissions. She called the decision to cancel CMS a “grave mistake.”
“If you cannot measure emissions reductions, you cannot be confident that countries are adhering to the agreement,” she said.
Phil Duffy, president of the Woods Hole Research Center, concurred. He told Science that the CMS project was an “obvious target” for the Trump administration because of how it was used to help other nations understand their emissions output.
However, government spokesperson Steve Cole attributed the project’s scrapping to “budget constraints and higher priorities within the science budget.” According to Agence France-Presse, Cole explained a budget move by Congress, which didn’t include the CMS project, “allowed” the administration to scrap the program.
4 hours
The Trump administration quietly scrapped another Obama-era climate initiative last week. One critic called the move a "grave mistake." (Scott Barbour/Getty Images)
135 Follow
Chris EnloeWeekend Editor
Article GoalInform
President Donald Trump’s administration recently quietly killed an Obama-era NASA program that tracked gases environmentalists believe contribute to man-made climate change.
Science magazine first reported the news last week.
Special: First-Look: Expert who predicted Bitcoin $20K says 2018 may be even bigger
What are the details?
The NASA program, known as the Carbon Monitoring System, measured carbon dioxide and methane gases in the atmosphere and tracked the planet’s flow of carbon, creating high-resolution models for scientists.
Carbon dioxide and methane are two so-called greenhouse gases that scientists believe contribute to global warming.
According to Science, the program cost taxpayers $10 million to operate each year. It was established in 2010.
Why was the program cut?
It’s not immediately clear why the administration scrapped the project. According to Science, the move is related to the White House’s continued “broad attack on climate science.”
Meanwhile, Kelly Sims Gallagher, a professor at Tufts University, told Science the move is related to Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change because the CMS project was helping other countries measure their greenhouse gas emissions. She called the decision to cancel CMS a “grave mistake.”
“If you cannot measure emissions reductions, you cannot be confident that countries are adhering to the agreement,” she said.
Phil Duffy, president of the Woods Hole Research Center, concurred. He told Science that the CMS project was an “obvious target” for the Trump administration because of how it was used to help other nations understand their emissions output.
However, government spokesperson Steve Cole attributed the project’s scrapping to “budget constraints and higher priorities within the science budget.” According to Agence France-Presse, Cole explained a budget move by Congress, which didn’t include the CMS project, “allowed” the administration to scrap the program.
Trump just killed another Obama-era government climate program. Critics call it a ‘grave mistake.’
4 hours
The Trump administration quietly scrapped another Obama-era climate initiative last week. One critic called the move a "grave mistake." (Scott Barbour/Getty Images)
135 Follow
Chris EnloeWeekend Editor
Article GoalInform
President Donald Trump’s administration recently quietly killed an Obama-era NASA program that tracked gases environmentalists believe contribute to man-made climate change.
Science magazine first reported the news last week.
Special: First-Look: Expert who predicted Bitcoin $20K says 2018 may be even bigger
What are the details?
The NASA program, known as the Carbon Monitoring System, measured carbon dioxide and methane gases in the atmosphere and tracked the planet’s flow of carbon, creating high-resolution models for scientists.
Carbon dioxide and methane are two so-called greenhouse gases that scientists believe contribute to global warming.
According to Science, the program cost taxpayers $10 million to operate each year. It was established in 2010.
Why was the program cut?
It’s not immediately clear why the administration scrapped the project. According to Science, the move is related to the White House’s continued “broad attack on climate science.”
Meanwhile, Kelly Sims Gallagher, a professor at Tufts University, told Science the move is related to Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change because the CMS project was helping other countries measure their greenhouse gas emissions. She called the decision to cancel CMS a “grave mistake.”
“If you cannot measure emissions reductions, you cannot be confident that countries are adhering to the agreement,” she said.
Phil Duffy, president of the Woods Hole Research Center, concurred. He told Science that the CMS project was an “obvious target” for the Trump administration because of how it was used to help other nations understand their emissions output.
However, government spokesperson Steve Cole attributed the project’s scrapping to “budget constraints and higher priorities within the science budget.” According to Agence France-Presse, Cole explained a budget move by Congress, which didn’t include the CMS project, “allowed” the administration to scrap the program.
YEAH !
Winning !
Sheriff Joe
DA
Alaska pols extremely worried that climate change will bring warmer temperatures
MAY 16, 2018
What's the very worst thing you can imagine happening to Alaska? If you're a liberal politician, you fear warm weather! That's right, the liberals who...
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...te_change_will_bring_warmer_temperatures.html
MAY 16, 2018
What's the very worst thing you can imagine happening to Alaska? If you're a liberal politician, you fear warm weather! That's right, the liberals who...
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...te_change_will_bring_warmer_temperatures.html
Hüsker Dü
DA
Nutters, so myopic.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Your blinders firmly in place.
Bruddah IZ
DA
"Zero-emission" vehicles are only as clean as the power source they plug into.
Bruddah IZ
DA
The newest ZEVs (Zero Emission Vehicles) are impressive technologically. But there is no economic basis for the billions of dollars spent subsidizing their adoption. The entire premise for subsidizing ZEVs and the infrastructure needed to power them—reduced air pollution and lower CO2 emissions—is flawed.
The simple fact is that, because of stringent emissions standards and low-sulfur gasoline, new ICVs (Internal Combustion Vehicles) today emit very little pollution, and they will emit even less in the future. Compared with new ICVs, ZEVs charged with the forecast mix of electric generation will emit more criteria air pollutants—SO2, NOx, and particulates—not less. And although ZEVs will emit less CO2 than ICVs, the projected reduction in CO2 emissions, below 1 percent of total forecast U.S. CO2 emissions, will have no measurable impact on climate and, hence, no economic value.
ZEV subsidies also impose disproportionate costs on lower-income consumers to benefit higher-income ones. Historically, ZEV purchasers have had much higher household incomes than average. Moreover, ZEV purchasers are primarily homeowners, who benefit not only from subsidies to purchase their vehicles but also from subsidies to install charging and solar [photovoltaic] (PV) systems.
ZEV purchasers who install behind-the-meter solar PV reap additional subsidies by not paying the full costs of providing them with backup power, not paying the full costs for upgrading local electric utility distribution systems to support their ZEVs, and not paying the full costs of utility-owned public charging stations that they can use. ...
The bottom line is that the economic and environmental rationales for subsidizing ZEVs do not withstand scrutiny. These subsidies, along with mandates for ZEV adoption, should be eliminated.
The simple fact is that, because of stringent emissions standards and low-sulfur gasoline, new ICVs (Internal Combustion Vehicles) today emit very little pollution, and they will emit even less in the future. Compared with new ICVs, ZEVs charged with the forecast mix of electric generation will emit more criteria air pollutants—SO2, NOx, and particulates—not less. And although ZEVs will emit less CO2 than ICVs, the projected reduction in CO2 emissions, below 1 percent of total forecast U.S. CO2 emissions, will have no measurable impact on climate and, hence, no economic value.
ZEV subsidies also impose disproportionate costs on lower-income consumers to benefit higher-income ones. Historically, ZEV purchasers have had much higher household incomes than average. Moreover, ZEV purchasers are primarily homeowners, who benefit not only from subsidies to purchase their vehicles but also from subsidies to install charging and solar [photovoltaic] (PV) systems.
ZEV purchasers who install behind-the-meter solar PV reap additional subsidies by not paying the full costs of providing them with backup power, not paying the full costs for upgrading local electric utility distribution systems to support their ZEVs, and not paying the full costs of utility-owned public charging stations that they can use. ...
The bottom line is that the economic and environmental rationales for subsidizing ZEVs do not withstand scrutiny. These subsidies, along with mandates for ZEV adoption, should be eliminated.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Green energy produced by fossil fuels.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Tesla's Electric Cars Aren't as Green as You Might Think ...
https://www.wired.com/2016/03/teslas-electric-cars-might-not-green...
... a material destined for your zero-emissions car. ... for a battery that comes out of a car to go to a landfill for ... the environmental costs of making ...
Bruddah IZ
DA
We can’t look at mining as an over-there thing and at Tesla as an over-here thing. They’re intricately linked.
DAVID ABRAHAM
Sheriff Joe
DA
Didn't Mr Husker have a quote about facts the other day?
Bruddah IZ
DA
Lol!
Bruddah IZ
DA
Yes. He didnʻt know it though.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Atta boy.