RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2023/05/04/king_charles_iii_has_a_climate_record_to_live_down_897662.html

This Saturday’s coronation of King Charles III marks a significant moment in Britain’s history. No previous constitutional monarch has expressed his political views so openly. Unlike his mother and grandfather, whose opinions, if they had any, remained unknown to the general public, the king’s record-setting seventy years as heir apparent to the British throne saw him define himself as a deeply committed environmentalist.

In 2000, the BBC invited the then-Prince of Wales to give the last of the 2000 Millennium Reith lectures on sustainable development. Charles spoke of his belief in the “bounds of balance, order and harmony in the natural world which sets limits to our ambitions and define the parameters of sustainable development.” He name-checked the founders of the modern environmental movement—Rachel Carson and Fritz Schumacher, authors, respectively, of Silent Spring and Small is Beautiful. He embraced the precautionary principle, warning that the absence of hard scientific evidence of harmful consequences from genetically modified (GM) crops should not be taken as a green light to exceed nature’s limits. 

Instead of looking to science for all the answers, mankind should work with the grain of nature, Charles argued. If a fraction of the investment going into GM technologies was devoted to improving traditional systems of agriculture, “the results would be remarkable,” he declared. He then praised fellow Reith lecturer Vandana Shiva, an environmental campaigner and director of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology in New Delhi, for condemning large-scale commercial farming “so persuasively and so convincingly.”

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/05/05/were-taking-bets-how-long-before-environmentalists-start-attacking-evs/

Today, you’re not allowed to say a bad word about electric cars. They’re planet savers, after all. Environmentalists tell us so. But there will come a day — in the not-too-distant future — when the climate change fanatics will decide that EVs are planet killers, too.

We’ve seen this bait-and-switch tactic before.

Back in 2007, energy producers pumped money into environmental groups to promote natural gas. The Sierra Club used the funds to mount a “Beyond Coal” campaign touting the benefits of gas. Joe Romm, a climate advocate at the Center for American Progress, declared that natural gas “may be the single biggest game changer for climate action in the next two decades.”

Then came the fracking revolution, and the resulting abundance of natural gas caused power plants across the country to switch to gas from coal. Then environmentalists decided natural gas wasn’t so good after all. By 2015, they were at war with it. The motto for the Sierra Club’s new “Beyond Natural Gas” was “Dirty, Dangerous, and Run Amok.”

Environmentalists tried to stop fracking, opposed new pipeline development, and then started pushing for bans on gas-fueled appliances.

More than 70 cities in California alone have voted to ban natural gas hookups in new homes. New York became the first to impose a statewide ban. Sarah Fox, an associate law professor at Northern Illinois University School of Law, gleefully told CNN that this ban “is becoming a mainstream policy.”

Soon it will be the auto industry’s turn.

Just as natural gas producers before them, they are bear-hugging green groups and working arm-in-arm with government while promising to bring forth a magical electric car future.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2023/05/03/slipstream_climate_envoy_john_kerrys_jet-set_spending_is_getting_plenty_of_cloud_cover_897101.html

John Kerry leads an international jet-set life that might exhaust a runway model. If President Biden’s special envoy for climate was not in Washington or relaxing at his mansion near Nantucket Harbor, he could be found in Brazil, Panama, the Bahamas, or Germany. And that’s just in February and March. 

The boss and his climate czar: Kerry is indefatigable in attending conferences and meetings in far-flung posts and glittering capitals. But details are scant.

While Kerry trumpets his meetings and appearances around the world, the State Department wraps the rest of his efforts in a cloak of secrecy usually reserved for CIA black box operations. It has refused to specify lists of people he is meeting with and who is advising him as he circles the globe. His office has stonewalled requests for budget and staffing information from legislators and government watchdog groups. In response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed last year by RealClearInvestigations for a breakdown on how the climate envoy’s roughly $16.5 million 2022 budget was spent, the State Department said it could not comply with the request until April 2025, months after both the 2024 election and the expiration of President Biden’s current term. 

The secrecy surrounding Kerry’s work is reaching a boiling point with the threat of a congressional subpoena. 

Frustrated that Kerry’s office ignored two previous requests for detailed information about its budget when his party was in the minority, Republican Rep. James Comer, who now heads the House Oversight Committee, sent what he labeled a final courtesy letter on April 25 and added that a subpoena would accompany the next request if Kerry’s “powerful, unchecked position” continued to hide the information. 

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/05/01/hot-hot-hot/

The sky warriors hold the climate models that have been predicting global doom to be sacrosanct. But as we have reported many times in the past, they’re flawed. A new research paper confirms our warnings. It would be helpful if the brand name media would make note of it. We won’t be holding our own hot air, though.

A January report from Berkeley Earth – self-described as a “non-profit research organization” that “has been preparing independent analyses of global mean temperature changes since 2013″ – starts out as anyone would expect: with a frightful declaration “that 2022 was nominally the fifth warmest year on Earth since 1850.” Which of course means nothing.

It goes on to say “​​the last eight years have included all eight of the warmest years observed in the instrumental record,” another string of words that sound ominous but aren’t. 

What is important, however, is buried near the bottom of the report.

Since 1980, Earth’s temperature trend “has changed little.” The researchers reckon that global temperatures have increased 0.19 degrees Celsius per decade over that period. The data was pulled from 50,498 weather stations combined with sea-surface temperature data.

With this in mind, let’s take a look at the predictions that have been made by the climate models. Their forecasts indicate that ​​temperatures should be increasing at the rate of about 0.28–0.29 degrees Celsius per decade. That’s about 50% higher than the increases Berkeley Earth found.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/04/27/dr-richard-lindzen-exposes-climate-change-as-a-politicised-power-play-motivated-by-malice-and-profit/

Veteran climate expert Dr Richard Lindzen made a name for himself before the fundamentally flawed field of climate science that we know today was invented. In an interview with the pioneering atmospheric physicist and former emeritus professor of meteorology at MIT, he recounted events that occurred in the 1980s, which gave birth to the all-consuming climate change narrative that prevails today.

Having begun his research on climate change in the mid-70s motivated by a sincere interest in understanding the Earth’s climate regimes, Lindzen’s assessment of the various elements paraded as scientific evidence of an impending climate catastrophe is remarkably sensible.

What’s particularly revealing from his recollection of events is how complicit the media and politicians have been in forcing the disastrous climate change narrative upon an unsuspecting and trusting public from the very beginning.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/04/bidens_promotion_of_electic_cars_could_be_in_for_a_big_surprise.html

Anything the Bidenites can do, the radical leftists running Chile can do better.

Which takes us from the world of Sam Brinton managing U.S. nuclear waste in the states, to (hold muh’ pisco), Chile nationalizing its lithium mines and bringing in a purple-haired feminist activist social-worker academic to regulate their activities instead.

Get a load of Chile’s new “Seremi,” or, secretary of the regional ministry, for the mighty mining province of Antofagasta, Macarena Barramuno, who’s been named for that job in Chile’s desert north.

Antofagasta is home to Chile’s gargantuan lithium mining reserves, the world’s second-largest, whose extraction is used create batteries for Joe Biden’s much-promoted electric cars.

A Google Translate of an item that ran in local PiTV Noticias Calama in neighboring Atacama reads (I left the translation imperfect):

MACARENA BARRAMUÑO ASSUMES AS NEW MINING SEREMI IN ANTOFAGASTA

The social worker took over today, replacing Ruth Rodriguez, who declined to assume the position due to problems.

During the morning, Macarena Barramuño González, a social worker by profession and Master of Development studies specialization of Gender, from the University of Melbourne, took over as the new Mining Seremi for the Antofagasta region, who has developed her career mainly in community management designing , coordinating, and directing initiatives with the purpose of transforming and improving communities.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/04/a_test_case_to_expose_the_tyranny_of_the_administrative_state.html

Let us suppose you draw water and sediment in small quantities from a stream bed. After removing some solid material, you let the remainder flow back into the stream without adding anything. Are you polluting the stream? Common sense dictates one answer. But an overzealous Idaho green group and a federal court do not see it that way.

So Shannon Poe, a suction dredge miner, ended up paying a $150,000 fine after a citizen suit was brought against him in 2018 by the Idaho Conservation League (ICL). Technically, the fine, imposed by Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge Raymond E. Patricco in September 2022, was for not obtaining permits for suction mining (NPDES permit IDG370000). Which means the activity isn’t banned outright as polluting. But before that, Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge Ronald E. Bush (see page 11 of his judgement) had determined that “the very nature of Mr. Poe’s suction dredge mining added pollutants to the South Fork Clearwater River.”

In March this year, Poe appealed the ruling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He is being defended by the pro bono law firm Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF). The foundation says that in fining Poe, the U.S. District Court in Idaho relied on a 1990 judgement of the Ninth Circuit court that went by the Environment Protection Agency’s (EPA) dubious interpretation of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The PLF maintains this is indefensible, and points out that the 33-year-old ruling has essentially been overruled by the Supreme Court on at least two occasions.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/04/24/the-inhumanity-of-the-green-agenda/

‘Man is the measure of all things’, Greek philosopher Protagoras wrote over 2,500 years ago. Unfortunately, our elites today tend not to see it that way.

In recent years, the overused word ‘sustainability’ has fostered a narrative in which human needs and aspirations have taken a back seat to the green austerity of Net Zero and ‘degrowth’. The ruling classes of a fading West are determined to save the planet by immiserating their fellow citizens. Their agenda is expected to cost the world $6 trillion per year for the next 30 years. Meanwhile, they will get to harvest massive green subsidies and live like Renaissance potentates.

In Enemies of Progress, author Austin Williams suggests that ‘the mantra of sustainability’ starts with the assumption that humanity is ‘the biggest problem of the planet’, rather than the ‘creators of a better future’. Indeed, many climate scientists and green activists see having fewer people on the planet as a key priority. Their programme calls not only for fewer people and fewer families, but also for lower consumption among the masses. They expect us to live in ever smaller dwelling units, to have less mobility, and to endure more costly home heating and air-conditioning. These priorities are reflected in a regulatory bureaucracy that, if it does not claim justification from God, acts as the right hand of Gaia and of sanctified science.

The question we need to ask is: sustainability for whom? US Treasury secretary Janet Yellen recently suggested that her department sees climate change as ‘the greatest economic opportunity of our time’. To be sure, there is lots of gold in green for the same Wall Street investors, tech oligarchs and inheritors who fund the campaigns of climate activists. They increasingly control the media, too. The Rockefellers, heirs to the Standard Oil fortune, and other ultra-wealthy greens are currently funding climate reporters at organs like the Associated Press and National Public Radio.

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/04/25/youll-have-no-power-and-you-will-like-it/

While campaigning in 2019, Joe Biden guaranteed “we’re going to end fossil fuels.” What he didn’t say is that eliminating fossil fuels will create a troublesome scarcity of electricity. He also didn’t say that was part of the plan, even though it just might be.

Now with the power of the presidency behind him – again we ask, how could such a disastrous event happen? – Biden is just a few pages of paperwork away from forcing natural gas- and coal-fired power plants to sharply cut their greenhouse emissions. If the emission caps can’t be met, power plants will then have to adopt carbon capture technology, which is quite expensive.

Our friends at the Committee to Unleash Prosperity had an interesting response to the news.

“Ben Franklin,” they said, “is often heralded as the man who discovered the power of electricity. Joe Biden wants to be the president who abolished it.”

Output cuts that will be required under the proposed regime “are so stringent,” says the CTUP, that “fossil fuel plants – which supply around 65% of America’s power – would be technologically incapable of complying.” The only way they will be able to stay open and generating power is if Americans’ utility bills are raised “dramatically.” If not, they close, and the power they produce is gone.

The administration knows this. The administration doesn’t care. The administration, driven by the hard-left zealots that run the Democratic Party, wants the rest of us to make do with less.