Rajendra Pachauri , chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), responded to the errors exposed in the IPCC report saying that “Scientists are demonised because of one error in 3000 pages of evidence.” Truth be told, there were several errors uncovered in the report including questionable sources in the assessment of mountain ice reduction in the Andes, Alps and Africa as well as acknowledged overstating crop loss in Africa, Amazon rain forest depletion, sea level increases in the Netherlands. But Pachauri only acknowledges that the Himalayan glaciers will …
One of the common arguments made against wind power is that without government subsidies, mandates or tax credits, wind turbines would not be built. But even when companies do receive preferential treatment to build windmills, just because they’re built doesn’t mean they’re going to work. For that, there needs to be (drum roll, please)…wind! A report from Britain says: “The analysis of power output found that more than 20 wind farms are operating at less than one-fifth of their full capacity. Experts say many turbines are going up on sites …
Why has American’s concern with global warming dropped to dead last among issues surveyed (even dead last among environmental issues)? Because a great deal of their concern was based on projections that have been dramatically toned down or exposed as outright fraud. The hysteria is unsupportable and people have caught on. The very active 2005 hurricane season, underscored by hurricanes Rita and Katrina, put the national psyche in a receptive mood for Al Gore’s inaccurate portrayal of 2005 as the base of an exponentially growing hurricane horror story. Subsequent quiet …
The way Washington is operating, the fate of nuclear energy may be in trouble in the United States. When something’s unpopular with the American public, the government will find a way to make it move forward. This past weekend’s vote proves to be a pretty good example of that. A recently released Gallup poll shows support for nuclear at an all-time high of 62 percent: “A majority of Americans have typically favored using nuclear power to provide electricity for the United States since Gallup began asking about this topic in …
President Obama has been quite adamant about his push to transition to a clean energy economy, most notably by subsidizing wind and solar energy sources. He argues we need the government to invest in renewable energy to strengthen our economy and reduce the earth’s fever before it’s too late. Despite the Congress’s attempt to address the nation’s economic concerns and the government’s climate concerns, Washington’s policy prescriptions may not be all they’re cracked up to be. Consider a new study from MIT on wind power says that large wind farms …
These are times straight out of Alice in Wonderland, as everything becomes an “un-birthday” and definitions are turned on their head. Climate change scientists, according to The Washington Times this last weekend, are turning to PR, rather than data, to defend their work. Then there’s Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, who yesterday continued to make patently false job-creation claims to sell the administration’s radical environmental agenda. His timing was unerringly bad, as his statements came on heels of further evidence that two front-runners—California and Europe—are discovering that their “green” policies …
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is attempting to do what couldn’t be done at the international climate change conference in Copenhagen last December: Transfer large sums of wealth from developed countries to developing ones in the name of climate change. From BusinessWeek: Dominique Strauss-Kahn, head of the International Monetary Fund, said the organization is helping to set up a “green fund” that would raise $100 billion a year by 2020 to mitigate the effects of climate change in developing countries. Strauss-Kahn indicated the fund may use its quotas, which reflect …
The same ethical advice for doctors also makes sense for Congress as it considers several pending global warming bills – first do no harm. Given serious questions about global warming science as well as the efficacy of costly proposals to address it, the best choice for Washington is none of the above. With economy-wide cap and trade stalled in the Senate, a number of slightly scaled back variants have been proposed, including measures targeting selected industries or a carbon tax. All threaten to do more harm than good.
“The science behind climate change is settled, and human activity is responsible for global warming. That conclusion is not a partisan one.” – Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson. Forget being partisan or not. That conclusion of settled science isn’t existent. It hasn’t been for a long time, but they are especially bold words in light of the climate scandal involving the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and the flaws uncovered in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. Yesterday, the Senate Minority Committee on Environment and …
The following Q&A with The Heritage Foundation’s Ben Lieberman is cross-posted from The Washington Post’s Planet Panel: Q: As the controversy swirling around the IPCC deepens at the same time some are questioning the significance of global warming now that large portions of the U.S. are buried under record-breaking snow, what kind of information do policymakers need to make decisions about climate change? Any risks of global warming need to be weighed against the risks of global warming policies. Policymakers must have accurate information on both sides of the equation …
