tagged w/ cap and trade
Read the Emails and discover the coverup for yourselves.
By Muriel Kane
Friday, December 9, 2011
When asked about his views on climate change at a campaign event, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney replied that the earth might be getting warmer, but that his top priority as president would be to increase energy production in the United States.
“I’m not a scientist, so I don’t know the answer to these things,” he told the questioner. “I think the earth is getting warmer. May be wrong. I think we probably contribute something to it, but I don’t know if we contribute a little or a lot. And therefore, when I come to the policies I’d put in place, I do not support cap and trade policies, which raise the cost of energy.”
“Scientists will figure that out ten, twenty, fifty years from now,” he concluded. “But the right policy for me is, use our domestic sources of energy — including our renewables, and our gas, and our coal, and our nuclear, and our oil — and that’s the right course for America.”
In sharp contrast with Romney’s suggestion that the question of climate change can be deferred for another fifty years, however, the majority of scientists have already concluded that man-made global warming is real, has already contributed to an unprecedented number of climate disasters, and will be irreversible unless significant changes are made within the next decade.
This video is from CNN, broadcast Dec. 9, 2011.
"Seems the GOP is always willing to kick the can down the road... More often then not, after they have been here and gone!!!"By Muriel Kane Friday, December 9, 2011 When asked about his views on climate... more
The Story of Cap & Trade is a fast-paced, fact-filled look at the leading climate solution being discussed at Copenhagen and on Capitol Hill. Host Annie Leonard introduces the energy traders and Wall Street financiers at the heart of this scheme and reveals the “devils in the details” in current cap and trade proposals: free permits to big polluters, fake offsets and distraction from whats really required to tackle the climate crisis. If youve heard about Cap & Trade, but arent sure how it works (or who benefits), this is the film is for you. http://www.factoverfiction.com/article/3536The Story of Cap & Trade is a fast-paced, fact-filled look at the leading climate... more
Gas is well over $4 a gallon in most places in California — and soaring elsewhere as well. But are such high energy prices good or bad?
That should be a stupid question. Yet it is not, when the Obama administration has stopped new domestic offshore oil exploration in many American waters, curbed oil leases in the West, and keeps oil-rich areas of Alaska exempt from drilling. Last week, President Obama went to Brazil and declared of that country’s new offshore finds: “With the new oil finds off Brazil, President [Dilma] Rousseff has said that Brazil wants to be a major supplier of new stable sources of energy, and I’ve told her that the United States wants to be a major customer, which would be a win-win for both our countries.”
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Consider the logic of the president’s Orwellian declaration: The United States in the last two years has restricted oil exploration of the sort Brazil is now rushing to embrace. We have run up more than $4 trillion in consecutive budget deficits during the Obama administration and are near federal insolvency. Therefore, the United States should be happy to borrow more money to purchase the sort of “new stable sources of energy” from Brazil’s offshore wells that we most certainly will not develop off our own coasts.
It seems as if paying lots more for electricity and gas, in European fashion, was originally part of the president’s new green agenda. He helped push cap-and-trade legislation through the House of Representatives in 2009. Had such Byzantine regulations become law, a recessionary economy would have sunk into depression. Obama appointed the incompetent Van Jones as “green-jobs czar” — until Jones’s wild rantings confirmed that he knew nothing about his job description “to advance the administration’s climate and energy initiatives.”
At a time of trillion-dollar deficits, the administration is borrowing billions to promote high-speed rail, and is heavily invested in the federally subsidized $42,000 Government Motors Chevy Volt. Apparently the common denominator here is a deductive view that high energy prices will force Americans to emulate European centrally planned and state-run transportation.
That conclusion is not wild conspiracy theory, but simply the logical manifestation of many of the Obama administration’s earlier campaign promises. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu — now responsible for the formulation of American energy policy — summed up his visions to the Wall Street Journal in 2008: “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” I think Chu is finally figuring out the “somehow.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/262941/man-made-energy-crisis-victor-davis-hanson?page=1Gas is well over $4 a gallon in most places in California — and soaring... more
Fury is building over rolling nationwide blackouts triggered by the Obama administration's deliberate agenda to block the construction of new coal-fired plants, as local energy companies struggle to meet Americans' power demands amidst some of the coldest weather seen in decades.
- As we reported yesterday, four hospitals in Texas reacted furiously after they were hit with planned outages despite being promised they would be spared even as power to Super Bowl venues remains uninterrupted.
- Thousands in New Mexico have been left without natural gas as Gov. Susana Martinez on Thursday declared a state of emergency. "Due to statewide natural gas shortages, I have ordered all government agencies that do not provide essential services to shut down and all nonessential employees to stay home" on Friday, Martinez said after meeting with public safety personnel in Albuquerque," reports the Associated Press.
- Borderland residents have been asked to limit their use of natural gas as the Texas Gas Service asks that larger commercial facilities voluntarily close their doors to save supplies.
- People in Tucson have been asked to limit their use of hot water and moderate their thermostat levels to save on energy.
- Shortages of natural gas in San Diego County has forced utility companies to "cut or reduce the gas supplied to some of their largest commercial and industrial customers," reports North County Times.
- In El Paso, "Hundreds of thousands of electricity customers continue to face periodic blackouts, and nearly 900 gas customers still have no heat," reports the El Paso Times, with El Paso Electric resorting to using generators in a struggle to meet demand while still having to implement forced outages.Fury is building over rolling nationwide blackouts triggered by the Obama... more
(CNSNews.com) – The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is teaching farmers how to participate in “carbon markets” despite the fact that such markets do not exist and Congress – in rejecting cap and trade legislation last year – has refused to create them.
Deputy Secretary of Agriculture Kathleen Merrigan made the admission at the WorldWatch Institute’s 2011 State of World Symposium Wednesday, saying that one of the ways USDA was dealing with climate change was to teach American farmers how to participate in “carbon markets,” the technical term for a cap and trade program.
“[USDA] will show farmers clearly and directly how they can benefit from participating in carbon markets,” Merrigan said. “It’s got to go from the drawing board to the boardroom.”
A carbon market is the technical term for what is commonly known as a cap and trade program, a program where businesses – including farms – are forced to trade carbon allowances or credits on the market, effectively putting a price on emitting carbon dioxide.
CNSNews.com asked Merrigan why USDA would be trying to show farmers how to benefit from a program that does not exist. Merrigan did not directly answer before being pulled away from the interview by a USDA spokesman.
more at link...
Here's a Ponzi-Scheme that will make Madoff look like a piker.(CNSNews.com) – The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is teaching farmers... more
Would President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency really force Americans to pay a tax on "rainwater runoff" from homes and small businesses?
You bet they would. In fact, the EPA, under radical environmentalist Lisa Jackson, is proposing regulations to do just that.Would President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency really force Americans to... more
Global warming-inspired cap and trade has been one of the most stridently debated public policy controversies of the past 15 years. But it is dying a quiet death. In a little reported move, the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) announced on Oct. 21 that it will be ending carbon trading – the only purpose for which it was founded – this year.Global warming-inspired cap and trade has been one of the most stridently debated... more
Latest News Updates Today Show Halloween Costumes 2010 | Meo News: This is the time of year that gossip morning television opens their closets and presents the Today Show Halloween Costumes 2010 for the year.Latest News Updates Today Show Halloween Costumes 2010 | Meo News: This is the time... more
(VIDEO) Wealthy Multi-Millionare Nancy Pelosi ‘All About Fairness’ With Your Money, JUST NOT HERS!!!Pelosi: ‘It’s All About Fairness in Our Country’
October 19, 2010
by Jonathon M. Seidl
Speaking at a United Steelworkers event on Monday, Nancy Pelosi railed against the wealthy and income inequality in America:
“We’re talking about addressing the disparity of income where the wealthy people continue to get wealthier and some other people are falling out of the middle class when we want to bring many more people into the middle class.
Click to Watch....(VIDEO) Wealthy Multi-Millionare Nancy Pelosi ‘All About Fairness’ With Your Money, JUST NOT HERS!!!...http://ctpatriot1970.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/video-wealthy-multi-millionare-nancy-pelosi-all-about-fairness-with-your-money-just-not-hers/Pelosi: ‘It’s All About Fairness in Our Country’ October 19,... more
When British Foreign Secretary William Hague visited the U.S. last week, he placed combating climate change near the very top of the world's To Do list.
"Climate change is perhaps the 21st century's biggest foreign-policy challenge," Hague declared in a New York City speech. "An effective response to climate change underpins our security and prosperity." The danger was no longer just distant thunder, he suggested, warning that the recent devastating floods in Pakistan heralded the sort of extreme events that will become more common in a warmer world. "While no one weather event can ever be linked with certainty to climate change," he said, "the broad patterns of abnormality seen this year are consistent with climate-change models."
William Hague is not a holdover from the left-leaning Labor Government that British voters ousted last spring. He's not even from the centrist Liberal Democrats who are governing in a coalition with the Conservative Party of Prime Minister David Cameron. Hague is one of Cameron's predecessors as Conservative Party leader.
His strong words make it easier to recognize that Republicans in this country are coalescing around a uniquely dismissive position on climate change. The GOP is stampeding toward an absolutist rejection of climate science that appears unmatched among major political parties around the globe, even conservative ones.
This change has proceeded in two stages. First came a hardening of Republican opposition to cap-and-trade legislation intended to limit the emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases linked to climate change. Most congressional Republicans had always opposed such legislation, but that position wasn't monolithic: In 2005, Sen. John McCain of Arizona and five other Republicans voted for a cap-and-trade bill that he co-sponsored. Several GOP governors also acted on climate-change issues.
This year, when Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., spent months negotiating bipartisan cap-and-trade legislation, he could not attract any Republican co-sponsors -- not even McCain. And when National Journal recently surveyed the 21 GOP Senate challengers with a serious chance of winning this fall, each opposed cap-and-trade (including Rep. Mark Kirk of Illinois, who voted for it in 2009).
It is difficult to identify another major political party in any democracy as thoroughly dismissive of climate science as is the GOP here.
Even many climate-change activists prefer alternatives to cap-and-trade, such as a carbon tax. But virtually all of the serious 2010 GOP challengers have moved beyond opposing cap-and-trade to dismissing the scientific evidence that global warming is even occurring.
Senate nominees with tea party roots, such as Nevada's Sharron Angle, have expressed these views most emphatically. But the pattern of repudiation extends to more-measured nominees such as Ohio's Rob Portman and California's Carly Fiorina who pointedly insisted, "I'm not sure," when asked whether climate change was happening. Of the 20 serious GOP Senate challengers who have taken a position, 19 have declared that the science of climate change is inconclusive or flat-out incorrect. (Kirk is the only exception.) With sentiments among rank-and-file Republicans also trending that way, it's no coincidence that two Republicans who affirmed the science -- Rep. Michael Castle in Delaware and Sen. Lisa Murkowski in Alaska -- were defeated in Senate primaries this year.
Just for the record, when the nonpartisan National Academy of Sciences last reviewed the data this spring, it concluded: "A strong, credible body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems." Not only William Hague but such other prominent European conservatives as French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have embraced that widespread scientific conviction and supported vigorous action.
Indeed, it is difficult to identify another major political party in any democracy as thoroughly dismissive of climate science as is the GOP here. Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, says that although other parties may contain pockets of climate skepticism, there is "no party-wide view like this anywhere in the world that I am aware of."
It will be difficult for the world to move meaningfully against climate disruption if the United States does not. And it will be almost impossible for the U.S. to act if one party not only rejects the most common solution proposed for the problem (cap-and-trade) but repudiates even the idea that there is a problem to be solved. The GOP's stiffening rejection of climate science sets the stage for much heated argument but little action as the world inexorably warms -- and the dangers that Hague identified creep closer.
http://current.com/1s1r34cWhen British Foreign Secretary William Hague visited the U.S. last week, he placed... more
With Congress on the verge of passing a Cap and Trade scheme to hike taxes by $650 BILLION, create invasive new federal government powers and wipe out a million jobs, it's never been more important you and I stand up and voice our opposition.
That's why it is vital you sign this petition to your senators DEMANDING they vote against HR 2454, the so-called Cap and Trade Bill, or any other Cap and Tax legislation.
After you sign, please make a generous contribution to Campaign for Liberty to get more folks in this fight. Campaign for Liberty operates as government should, meaning we will not go into debt. We are entirely dependent on your ongoing financial support.
http://chooseliberty.org/cptahf.aspx?pid=nd3With Congress on the verge of passing a Cap and Trade scheme to hike taxes by $650... more
While many greens (you know who you are) are mourning the death of the cap and renewable energy standard as announced by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Senator Merkley (D-OR) is carrying the flame of energy legislation with his Oil Independence for a Stronger America Act. Do you think it's strong enough?While many greens (you know who you are) are mourning the death of the cap and... more
DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE say they will exploit the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico to ramrod through legislation addressing claims about cataclysmic global warming that objective scientists agree are spurious. According to a recent report in a mainstream New York daily, a summary of a closed-door Senate Democratic caucus meeting, leaked to the press, reveals that Democrats are seeking to use the spill as leverage to force Republican support, essentially saying that failure to vote for a climate change bill that is loaded down with new oil drilling regulations is a vote for Big Oil polluters.
In recent reports, AFP reporter Victor Thorn has been making the case that the internationalists see the disaster as an ideal time to force through new global climate change laws that will be profitable for them. What the Democrats are really going for is something known as “cap and trade.” In a nutshell, this involves bureaucrats setting carbon-emission standards on all U.S. factories. That is the “cap” portion of the plan. The “trade” part comes into play when factories cannot meet the levels set by government regulators.
Those corporations will then have to turn to others, who meet or come in under the emissions standards that have been imposed upon them. The companies that exceed their government-imposed standards will then be able to purchase or trade other companies’ remaining emissions levels so as to raise their own.
A new breed of carbon capitalists on Wall Street are already champing at the bit to create a market for “cap and trade,” whereby corporations will be able to trade emissions levels like they buy and sell commodities or swap stock. Of course, slash-and-burn speculators will also be able to get in on the horse trading, betting on futures and formulating exotic derivatives based on who will and will not be able to meet government imposed levels.
That is grounds enough for voting against cap and trade. However, the bigger problem stems from what the program will do to American business.
Heavy taxation and onerous regulations have already driven many corporations out of the United States in search of cheap or slave labor and limited government, where they can make a profit. Meanwhile, those patriotic companies that have chosen to stay in the United States will face even more complex regulations. In a continuing cycle that further squeezes domestic industry, the costs will be passed down to Main Street, making it even harder for consumers in the United States.
http://americanfreepress.net/html/ramrod_climate_bill_228.htmlDEMOCRATS IN THE SENATE say they will exploit the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of... more
Comprehensive energy legislation is likely off the table after the departure of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a Senate Democratic aide said Wednesday evening, but the chamber can still pass a "scaled back" bill that boosts clean energy.
"I just can't see where we'd get 60 votes for a comprehensive energy bill with a cap on carbon at this point," the aide to a senator on the Environment and Public Works Committee, who is closely involved with the issue, told Raw Story.
Graham, the sole and critical Republican in the Senate who pledged to support a cap and trade bill, told CongressDaily Wednesday he'd vote against the Kerry-Lieberman bill he helped craft, leaving Democrats confused and upset.Comprehensive energy legislation is likely off the table after the departure of Sen.... more
If you listen to climate scientists — and despite the relentless campaign to discredit their work, you should — it is long past time to do something about emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. If we continue with business as usual, they say, we are facing a rise in global temperatures that will be little short of apocalyptic. And to avoid that apocalypse, we have to wean our economy from the use of fossil fuels, coal above all.
But is it possible to make drastic cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions without destroying our economy?
Like the debate over climate change itself, the debate over climate economics looks very different from the inside than it often does in popular media. The casual reader might have the impression that there are real doubts about whether emissions can be reduced without inflicting severe damage on the economy. In fact, once you filter out the noise generated by special-interest groups, you discover that there is widespread agreement among environmental economists that a market-based program to deal with the threat of climate change — one that limits carbon emissions by putting a price on them — can achieve large results at modest, though not trivial, cost. There is, however, much less agreement on how fast we should move, whether major conservation efforts should start almost immediately or be gradually increased over the course of many decades.
In what follows, I will offer a brief survey of the economics of climate change or, more precisely, the economics of lessening climate change. I’ll try to lay out the areas of broad agreement as well as those that remain in major dispute. First, though, a primer in the basic economics of environmental protection.
Please read the rest of the article here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/magazine/11Economy-t.html?hp=&pagewanted=allIf you listen to climate scientists — and despite the relentless campaign to... more
Japanese metropolis launches Asia's first emissions cap-and-trade scheme.
Plans for a national Japanese emissions trading scheme may still be mired in confusion, but that has not stopped Tokyo winning the race to launch Asia's first carbon trading initiative.
The city last week kicked off its long-awaited carbon trading scheme, which will require 1,400 of Tokyo's most energy and carbon intensive organisations to meet legally binding emission targets modeled on those used in Europe's cap-and-trade scheme.
During the first phase of the scheme, which runs up to 2014, participating organisations will have to cut their carbon emissions by six per cent.
Those that fail to operate within their emission caps will from 2011 be required to purchase emission allowances to cover any excess emissions, or alternatively invest in renewable energy certificates or offset credits issued by smaller businesses or branch offices. However, under the rules of the scheme, credits issued outside of Tokyo can not exceed a third of the emission cuts required of participating organisations.
Those firms that fail to comply with the new rules will face fines and could also be named and shamed by the government. According to local reports, organisations that do not operate within their caps will also be ordered to cut emissions by 1.3 times the amount they failed to reduce emissions during the first phase of the scheme.
City officials said that in the long term the aim was to cut the metropolis' carbon emissions by 25 per cent on 2000 levels by 2020.Japanese metropolis launches Asia's first emissions cap-and-trade scheme.... more