Tweet
Food for thought on GHGs
Living here in Utah I am not one who believes in man made global warming.
After all we were not here to melt the glacier ice that made Lake Bonneville nor were we the cause to make it evaporate. It was the size of Lake Michagian and 1,200 ft deep.That's a lot of water. Dose all of the concrete we poured (heat retention) and carbon emissions have an effect maybe. But I remember way back when in science class we were taught how the sun affected the temperature of the earth. Now dose that change my desire for CNG no not at all. One thing we really need to worry about is how will Obama enforce the UN cap and trade treaty. It will be I believe the death of America. Very few Americans know how it works.
Please add [email protected] to your address book to ensure our emails reach your inbox.
November 5, 2008
Energy and Environment: Around the Interwebs
While “clean energy” companies are ready for a $150 billion bailout from a new administration, a former EPA deputy administrator reminds us: “The government isn’t very good” at energy research…Tasty Debate: Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups Mock Global Warming…TIME Asks: “Will Green Progress Be Stalled or Speeded by the Bad Economy?...Is The Economy Ford Tough?: Ford Accelerates F150 Production…China’s increase in carbon dioxide emissions over the next 20 years will exceed current US emissions
The Power of The New EPA
Dr. Margo Thorning of ACCF writes yesterday:
“Last week, Barack Obama declared that he would classify carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant to be regulated by EPA, a major reversal of policy from the Bush administration that could dramatically change the everyday lives of Americans.
“While the Clean Air Act has been appropriately used to curb smog, pollution, acid rain and ozone depletion, using it to combat greenhouse gases makes about as much sense as using a power drill to do brain surgery.
“Make no mistake, any policy aimed at reducing manmade GHG, whether it is a cap-and- trade system or a carbon tax, is going to be costly, but using the blunt and heavy regulatory hand of the Clean Air Act will have a tremendous economic impact not just on large carbon emitters, but on our very lifestyles…”
“MIT scientists baffled by global warming theory, contradicts scientific data”
The latest news:
“Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature - and not the direct result of man’s contributions…”
Hat tip: Marc Morano, who hat-tipped Tom Nelson.
“The Senate and the union hall: Where American climate policy will succeed or fail”
The view from the left, with insights for anyone concerned about how economic and environmental policy is likely to be shaped after the election.
After all we were not here to melt the glacier ice that made Lake Bonneville nor were we the cause to make it evaporate. It was the size of Lake Michagian and 1,200 ft deep.That's a lot of water. Dose all of the concrete we poured (heat retention) and carbon emissions have an effect maybe. But I remember way back when in science class we were taught how the sun affected the temperature of the earth. Now dose that change my desire for CNG no not at all. One thing we really need to worry about is how will Obama enforce the UN cap and trade treaty. It will be I believe the death of America. Very few Americans know how it works.
Please add [email protected] to your address book to ensure our emails reach your inbox.
November 5, 2008
Energy and Environment: Around the Interwebs
While “clean energy” companies are ready for a $150 billion bailout from a new administration, a former EPA deputy administrator reminds us: “The government isn’t very good” at energy research…Tasty Debate: Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups Mock Global Warming…TIME Asks: “Will Green Progress Be Stalled or Speeded by the Bad Economy?...Is The Economy Ford Tough?: Ford Accelerates F150 Production…China’s increase in carbon dioxide emissions over the next 20 years will exceed current US emissions
The Power of The New EPA
Dr. Margo Thorning of ACCF writes yesterday:
“Last week, Barack Obama declared that he would classify carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant to be regulated by EPA, a major reversal of policy from the Bush administration that could dramatically change the everyday lives of Americans.
“While the Clean Air Act has been appropriately used to curb smog, pollution, acid rain and ozone depletion, using it to combat greenhouse gases makes about as much sense as using a power drill to do brain surgery.
“Make no mistake, any policy aimed at reducing manmade GHG, whether it is a cap-and- trade system or a carbon tax, is going to be costly, but using the blunt and heavy regulatory hand of the Clean Air Act will have a tremendous economic impact not just on large carbon emitters, but on our very lifestyles…”
“MIT scientists baffled by global warming theory, contradicts scientific data”
The latest news:
“Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature - and not the direct result of man’s contributions…”
Hat tip: Marc Morano, who hat-tipped Tom Nelson.
“The Senate and the union hall: Where American climate policy will succeed or fail”
The view from the left, with insights for anyone concerned about how economic and environmental policy is likely to be shaped after the election.
If we were to fight WWII all over again we already lost because the EPA and the IPCC would say we are not GHG compliant
Comment