More Global Warming B.S.

This is one of the big reasons why the GOP does not get a dime from me: They buy into the global warming (now called climate change because it has stopped warming) horse hooey.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) co-authored an op-ed in the New York Times with Senator John Kerry (D-MA) entitled Yes We Can (Pass Climate Change Legislation). The op-ed asserts that the authors, and possibly most Democrat and Republican politicians, agree that climate change is real. It goes on to say that even "climate change skeptics" should support reducing our dependence on foreign oil at least for our national security, and warns us that if Congress doesn't create cap-and-tax legislation, then the EPA will regulate industries to prevent more "climate change," and that the EPA won't be providing the incentives and credits that Congress can create through legislation.

In short, Sen. Graham is still trying to sell Democrat-Light as being a reasonable, compromising Republican. Caca de toro, Lindsey! (Thought I should put that in a language that the amnesty advocate would feel more comfortable with.) Once again, Republicans are making the mistake of embracing a load of crap that will seriously harm our economy in an attempt to win the hearts and minds (not to mention money and votes) of independents and conservative Democrats. The thing that Lindsey and his other career politician Republican pals are not understanding is that 1) there is still a lot of debate in the science community over global warming/climate change, and regardless of what Al Gore says, the science is not settled; 2) they are alienating a large portion of their base by jumping on the Democrats' bandwagon, trying to play it off as being less Democrat-like by wanting to help industry ease into "saving the planet" by providing incentives in amendments to a bill that is a big pay-off to the green lobby; and 3) when independents get hurt by Republicans going Democrat-Light, those independents don't see any functional difference between the two parties, and will support the party with the best spin (usually the Democrats), or neither party at all.

Good work, Republicans. Keep alienating segments of your base and hurting independents. When the house of cards comes falling down, the Democrats are going to blame Lindsey and his fellow Republicans for causing the problem by watering down their original proposal. Many independents will swallow the Democrats' spin and move away from the GOP, while large portions of conservatives continue to become more disillusioned with the party they once supported.

When 2010 rolls around, I will vote for conservative candidates who won't sell my daughter's future down the river on some ill-conceived Democrat pipe-dream. And if there is no candidate worth voting for, then I will write in John Galt.

USMC 9971 OUT

Boehner Goes Through A 300 Page Amendment

This is a partial transcript that I put together while watching Rep. John Boehner on C-SPAN just under an hour ago. It is not an official transcript.

Rep. Waxman calls for a parliamentary inquiry to see how long the minority leader is allowed to speak when he was only yielded a few minutes. Boehner hits it out of the park at the end of the inquiry when he asks his fellow members of the House, "Don't you think the American people expect us to understand what's in this bill before we vote on it?"

This portion of the debate started at about 4:50 p.m. CDT.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH8, MINORITY LEADER): Is that what, ah, is that what Green Peace...

REP. HENRY WAXMAN (D-CA30): Parliamentary inquiry.

BOEHNER: ...demanded to be part of this bill? Madam Speaker, I have the time.

WAXMAN: Madam Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

BOEHNER: Now we get to page 34. Page 34 it says...

PRESIDER: If the gentleman will suspend. [garbled] Does the gentleman yield for a parliamentary inquiry?

BOEHNER: I'd be happy to yield to the gentleman.

WAXMAN: The Republican leader was yielded the balance of time, which I think amounted to around 4 or 5 minutes; he's talked for around 20. I know we have this magic minute that gives leaders a lot of extra time to speak, but I'm just wondering if there's some limit under the rules on the time that a leader may take, even though the time yielded was not 20 or 30 minutes.

PRESIDER: It's the custom of the House to hear the leader's remarks.

[APPLAUSE]

BOEHNER: When we get to page, when we get to page...

WAXMAN: Further parliamentary inquiry.

PRESIDER: Will the gentleman yield for a parliamentary inquiry?

BOEHNER: I'd be happy to yield to the gentleman.

PRESIDER: Gentleman from California.

WAXMAN: I know it's the custom of the House to give a little extra latitude. Is there any outside limit to the amount of time a leader might take? And do we have historical records that might be broken tonight?

[LAUGHTER]

PRESIDER: The custom...

WAXMAN: Or is this an attempt to get some people to leave on a close vote?

PRESIDER: The custom of the House is to listen to the leader's comments.

BOEHNER: Reclaiming my time, the gentleman...

[APPLAUSE]

BOEHNER: The gentleman's had his 30 years to put this bill together, and, ah, and the House is going to spend a whopping 5 hours debating the most profound piece of legislation to come to this floor in a hundred years. And, ah...

[APPLAUSE]

BOEHNER: And the chairman has the audacity to drop a 300-plus page amendment in the hopper at 3:09 a.m. this morning. And so I would ask my colleagues, "Don't you think the American people expect us to understand what's in this bill before we vote on it?"

[APPLAUSE]

BOEHNER: And so we get to page 34...

I'm still not happy with the Republicans, but Boehner got it right when he said that we, the American people, expect Congress to know what's in a bill before they vote on it.

Sound Off Like You've Got A Pair

On 01 October 2008, the Senate rushed a new version of the "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008" to a vote (the original version being voted down in the House two days earlier). That passed the Senate, and on 03 October 2008 the House of Representatives accepted the Senate's ammendment, voted to sent it to the president, and President Bush signed the piece of legislation that gave us the TARP program (a.k.a. The $700 Billion Bailout). There was no time for members of Congress (or the American people) to read and fully digest the entire text of that legislation before it became law.

The DJIA closed at 10,325.38 on 03 October 2008, but that was the last time that it closed above 10,000 points; every single trading day in the nearly nine months since that legislation was signed has recorded a close below the 10,000 mark. It is ironic that the legislation, which was touted as necessary to rush through in order to save the U.S. econonmy, heralded the dawn of the sub-10,000 point Dow Jones Industrials.

In February of this year, Congress was going to save us again by rushing "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" to a vote. Again, there was no time before the vote for members of Congress or citizens to actually read the full text of the bill that eventually became law. One would have thought that our esteemed leaders in Washington, D.C. would have learned from the TARP fiasco that legislation that is deemed critical to the economic well-being of America should not be rushed into law without allowing everyone the opportunity to read the full text of the legislation.

The votes on this legislation, when compared to the votes by the same members in October of 2008, should have been an eye-opener to many Americans that Congress is more interested in political gamesmanship and being able to say that they provided a "gimme" to their district, than they are in actually doing what is right for the country.

For example, Congressman Pete Visclosky, a Democrat representing Indiana's 1st District, voted against the "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008." Rep. Visclosky complained at the time that, "The Bush Administration is rushing us into spending $700 billion without stopping to think things through, because there just isn't time for thinking."

Fast forward to "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009." That bill had an even higher price tag on it than the TARP legislation did, and President Obama rushed the Congress into spending all that extra money without thinking it through by saying that the country could not "afford inaction or delay" on the economy at a time when people "are looking to Washington for action -- bold and swift." Did the esteemed Congressman from Indiana complain that the Obama Administration was rushing Congress into spending over $1 trillion dollars without stopping to think things through? No, he did not. Representative Visclosky voted for the bill.

Our legislators, Republicans and Democrats alike, seem to vote to appease either their party or special interests. Their votes rarely seem to be an attempt to advance what is in the best interest of the country as a whole.

Well, it appears that Congress is hell-bent on making that same mistake yet again. The amazing D.C. brain trust is now trying to rush through the "American Clean Energy and Security Act," once more allowing no time for anyone to read the entire text of the bill before it comes up for a vote. The environmental lobby wants their payback for political support, and Congress seems to be more than willing to screw the American people so that they can keep getting the cash from the greenies. The following is from The Sunlight Foundation:

This Friday, Congress plans to vote on a bill that could fundamentally alter the American economy, dramatically affect the climate, and have huge implications for our national security. But, right now no one knows what's in the bill or how it came to be.

Last week, the American Clean Energy and Security Act (the "Cap and Trade Energy Bill"), or H.R. 2454, was 946 pages long. Over the weekend, it ballooned to 1,201 pages with no explanation for how or why. It is currently only available online at the House Rules Committee, and is reported as "text of the bill to be introduced." This legislative maneuvering reminds us of the failure of Congress to make bills properly available before consideration. (More detailed explanation of this bill available via Sunlight's blog.) [...]

It's very likely that even many of those advocating for or against this legislation won't know what was inserted or what the final bill will be, since changes will be accepted right up until 9:30am on Thursday morning before an intended vote on Friday.

If the board of any company acted in the same rash and irresponsible manner that Congress does, and then that company started to falter and affect the livelihoods of many Americans, Congress would supeona those board members and hold hearings on the way that "big business" is hurting the ability of average Americans to provide for their families. Any member of the House that votes for this bill should be recalled, and put into forced labor for a term no less than the number of years that they have been milking the system by "serving" in the Congress.

We NEED to hold Congress accountable for their reckless actions, and to remind them that they work for us. Being a PUBLIC SERVANT should require them to actually SERVE the PUBLIC. See? It's right there in the title.

Get your heads wired to your tails, Congress, and actually do something in the service of the nation, not in the service of your own self-interests.

And the same goes for all of us, America. Get on the horn and let those dilettantes in Congress know that they are there to perform on our behalf, by our direction, and that they hold their positions in the halls of power only so long as we continue to permit them to do so.

I know that my patience, and the patience of most of the people that I know, is running extremely thin when in comes to the political leaders in our government. Time to make some noise so that Congress wakes the hell up and gets their act together.

I, for one, will not stand down, and I will not go quietly. Who is with me?

USMC 9971 OUT

Where's My Global Warming?

It's currently 0° F, with an expected low of -16° F and windchills of -30° F for later tonight. Tomorrow's forecast is for a high of -2° F.

Again, the warmest the temperature is expected to get tomorrow is 34° below freezing (F).

Where's that global warming, Mr. Gore? It better come soon, because I'm running out of the carbon credits that we're burning to stay warm.

Global warming my frozen tundra.

USMC 9971 OUT

Al Gore Calls For Civil Disobedience

Al Gore, having failed to successfully con enough Americans into buying his global warming b.s., has decided to call on young people to commit acts of civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants.

"If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration," Gore said, according to Reuters.

That's very grown-up of you, Al. Since you can't win the debate by successfully arguing the facts of the matter, you call upon young people who have fallen for your doom-and-gloom facade to violate the law in order to prevent legitimate commerce and enterprise from progressing.

Maybe if Al keeps this up, though, there might be a case to be made against him in the future for incitement of unlawful conduct.

USMC 9971 OUT

Everything Is On

The TV, all the radios, all of the lights, and almost all other electronic devices are turned on in our house. I've also turned up the heat (since global warming isn't heating us). Why? Because some worthless greeny types have kicked off something called "Earth Hour."

On March 29, 2008 at 8 p.m., join millions of people around the world in making a statement about climate change by turning off your lights for Earth Hour, an event created by the World Wildlife Fund.

So why burn excess energy? Why not? If there are enough greenies out there turning off all of their power, then my energy use won't make a difference. More importantly, however, it's because I'm paying for this little anti-protest protest by my own choice.

See, all of the "environmental" laws that the greenies want to pass force the cost of their activism on the rest of us. When gas prices go up because we aren't drilling in or around our own nation, we pay for it. When energy prices go up because wind and solar requirements don't generate the same amount of energy as the sources that they have been mandated to replace, we pay for it. These worthless activists and their supporters take money from me and my family, and all the while their actions do little if anything to save the planet.

So, unlike the greenies, my protest is only costing me money. And it is done by my own choice.

They, on the other hand, force the cost of their own unsubstantiated feel-good policies on the rest of us.

Turn on a few lights. It won't kill the planet, but it will upset a greeny.

USMC 9971 OUT

Climate Change And Fuels

Nick over at Libertarian Librarian has a post about bio-fuels and how they may be more detrimental to the environment and less fuel-efficient than gasoline. I made similar statements in a post about ethanol back in April of 2007.

In February of last year, Nigel Calder had a piece in The Sunday Times contesting the current climate change theories and noting alternate theories looking at solar activity.

So one awkward question you can ask, when you’re forking out those extra taxes for climate change, is “Why is east Antarctica getting colder?” It makes no sense at all if carbon dioxide is driving global warming. While you’re at it, you might inquire whether Gordon Brown will give you a refund if it’s confirmed that global warming has stopped. The best measurements of global air temperatures come from American weather satellites, and they show wobbles but no overall change since 1999.

That levelling off is just what is expected by the chief rival hypothesis, which says that the sun drives climate changes more emphatically than greenhouse gases do. After becoming much more active during the 20th century, the sun now stands at a high but roughly level state of activity. Solar physicists warn of possible global cooling, should the sun revert to the lazier mood it was in during the Little Ice Age 300 years ago.

Climate history and related archeology give solid support to the solar hypothesis. The 20th-century episode, or Modern Warming, was just the latest in a long string of similar events produced by a hyperactive sun, of which the last was the Medieval Warming.

Yesterday, Investor's Business Daily had an article regarding the concerns of scientists that slowing solar activity may be bringing about a cooler climate in the near future, no matter what the "global warming" scare might say.

In 2005, Russian astronomer Khabibullo Abdusamatov made some waves — and not a few enemies in the global warming "community" — by predicting that the sun would reach a peak of activity about three years from now, to be accompanied by "dramatic changes" in temperatures.

A Hoover Institution Study a few years back examined historical data and came to a similar conclusion.

"The effects of solar activity and volcanoes are impossible to miss. Temperatures fluctuated exactly as expected, and the pattern was so clear that, statistically, the odds of the correlation existing by chance were one in 100," according to Hoover fellow Bruce Berkowitz.

The study says that "try as we might, we simply could not find any relationship between industrial activity, energy consumption and changes in global temperatures."

The study concludes that if you shut down all the world's power plants and factories, "there would not be much effect on temperatures."

But if the sun shuts down, we've got a problem. It is the sun, not the Earth, that's hanging in the balance.

That last bit is what should concern a lot of people. If the climate turns towards a cooling trend, we will have a more challenging time maintaining an affordable food supply, and we will need to have additional resources to provide warmth over the cooler period.

Considering this, I would hope that our politicians would get off of the "subsidize bio-fuels" kick, and start directing those resources towards drilling for oil at home. Reserving domestic corn production for food could be essential if temperatures slide. Also, oil prices will likely remain constant, and if a cooling trend kicks in without having increased domestic supplies, then we will see prices sky-rocket due to need and demand.

If we take these actions and temperatures don't drop significantly, we still will have the benefits of lowering the cost of foods using corn, increasing domestic oil production that should help to at least stabilize prices, and provide us with the opportunity to have more time to focus attention on potential energy sources outside of fossil fuels and bio-fuels. None of that would be a bad turn.

USMC 9971 OUT

It's For Your Own Good, California

California may be taking a frightening step towards allowing the utilities or the state the ability to modify what you have your thermostat set to. Over at American Thinker, Joseph Somsel as a piece about California's newly proposed builing energy efficiency standards. I have excerpted the relevant section below.

SECTION 112 – MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR SPACE-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT

Certification by Manufacturers. Any space-conditioning equipment listed in this section may be installed only if the manufacturer has certified that the equipment complies with all the applicable requirements of this section.

(c) Thermostats6. All unitary heating and/or cooling systems including heat pumps that are not controlled by a central energy management control system (EMCS) shall have a Programmable Communicating Thermostat (PCT) that is certified by the manufacturer to the Energy Commission to meet the requirements of Subsections 112(c)(1) and 112(c)(2) below:

1. Setback Capabilities. All PCTs shall have a clock mechanism that allows the building occupant to program the temperature set points for at least four periods within 24 hours. Thermostats for heat pumps shall meet the requirements of Section 112(b).

2. Communicating Capabilities. All PCTs shall be distributed with a non-removable Radio Data System (RDS) communications device that is compatible with the default statewide DR communications system , which can be used by utilities to send price and emergency signals. PCTs shall be capable of receiving and responding to the signals indicating price and emergency events as follows.

A. Price Events. The PCT shall be shipped with default price-event offsets of +4°F for cooling and -4°F for heating enabled; however, customers shall be able to change the offsets and thermostat settings at any time during price events. Upon receiving a price-event signal, the PCT shall adjust the thermostat setpoint by the number of degrees indicated in the offset for the duration specified in the signal of the price event. The PCT shall also be equipped with the capability to allow customers to define setpoints for heating and cooling in response to price signals as an alternative to temperature-offsetting response, as described in Reference Joint Appendix JA5.

B. Emergency Events. Upon receiving an emergency signal, the PCT shall respond to commands contained in the emergency signal, including changing the setpoint by any number of degrees or to a specific temperature setpoint. The PCT shall not allow customer changes to thermostat settings during emergency events.

3. Other Required Capabilities. PCTs shall also have the following capabilities. Technical detail of items A though E below shall be included in Reference Joint Appendix JA5:

A. Include at least one industry standard expansion/communication port. Insertion of a utility-specific communications module shall disable the default statewide communications hardware built in to the PCT unless the utility module is removed or is no longer receiving a signal.

B. Provide user information regarding communications system connection status, type of event (price or emergency), and other maintenance-related information. This information shall be on the standard PCT display, using a Liquid Crystal Display, standalone indicator using Light Emitting Diodes, or other means.

C. At a minimum, standardize terminal mapping of terminal numbers 1-9. This approach must include 24 volt power supply, both analog and digital PCTs, and must support heat pumps with resistance heat strips and reversing valve in both residential and small commercial packaged units.

D. Include the capability to randomize, over a 30-minute period after the end of an event, the time at which the thermostat returns to the programmed setpoint.

E. Through user input be capable of addressability at the substation level or finer including individual PCT.

California Energy Commission 2008 Building Energy Efficiency Standards

If you think that this is too much control for the utilities and state, and if you live in California, then you may want to send your comments or opinions on this change to Chris Gekas, the process administrator (cgekas@energy.state.ca.us), by 30 January 2008, and the same to your elected public servants.

It may be a concept that was born of good intentions, but it is a frightening loss of control for California citizens if it actually comes to fruition.

USMC 9971 OUT

Changing Climate

From Orlando's Local6:

Conditions in parts of Central Florida were favorable for snow flurries Thursday because of clouds similar to those in the Great Lakes states that produce lake-effect snow.

A hard freeze warning was issued for areas north of Interstate 4 and counties located south of I-4 were under a general freeze warning.

With the wind chill, it felt like 15 degrees in Ocala, Local 6 reported Thursday.

From ABC News:

A wintry system that added inches to record snow accumulations in some Northern states sent temperatures plummeting Wednesday in the South, where farmers scrambled to protect their crops.

Temperatures were expected to drop into the 20s and teens in parts of Florida by Thursday morning, following the 30-degree temperatures some northern parts of the state saw Wednesday. [...]

Crops can withstand some cold, but not for long. Thirty-two degrees for four hours will damage an orange, for example, but 28 degrees for that long can actually ruin the tree. Most of the citrus industry is situated south, for this very reason, and in those areas it was not expected to get as cold.

From David Deming in the Washington Times:

Since the mid-19th century, the mean global temperature has increased by 0.7 degrees Celsius. This slight warming is not unusual, and lies well within the range of natural variation. Carbon dioxide continues to build in the atmosphere, but the mean planetary temperature hasn't increased significantly for nearly nine years. Antarctica is getting colder. Neither the intensity nor the frequency of hurricanes has increased. The 2007 season was the third-quietest since 1966. In 2006 not a single hurricane made landfall in the U.S.

South America this year experienced one of its coldest winters in decades. In Buenos Aires, snow fell for the first time since the year 1918. Dozens of homeless people died from exposure. In Peru, 200 people died from the cold and thousands more became infected with respiratory diseases. Crops failed, livestock perished, and the Peruvian government declared a state of emergency.

Unexpected bitter cold swept the entire Southern Hemisphere in 2007. Johannesburg, South Africa, had the first significant snowfall in 26 years. Australia experienced the coldest June ever. In northeastern Australia, the city of Townsville underwent the longest period of continuously cold weather since 1941. In New Zealand, the weather turned so cold that vineyards were endangered.

Send some carbon credits to people you love in Florida so that they can burn them to stay warm.

USMC 9971 OUT

Ethanol May Be Worse For Air Quality Than Gasoline

Here's an interesting article about a new study on the effects of ethanol from an engineering professor at Stanford University.

Switching from gasoline to ethanol — touted as a green alternative at the pump — may create dirtier air, causing slightly more smog-related deaths, a new study says. [...]

Ethanol would raise ozone levels, particularly in certain regions of the country, including the Northeast and Los Angeles.

"It's not green in terms of air pollution," said study author Mark Jacobson, a Stanford University civil and environmental engineering professor. "If you want to use ethanol, fine, but don't do it based on health grounds. It's no better than gasoline, apparently slightly worse."

Ethanol gives you a lower fuel economy than gasoline, many flex-fuel vehicles require a synthetic or special flex-fuel oil to prevent the negative effects of ethanol getting past the piston ring and reducing lubrication or diluting the engine oil, ethanol cannot be send via pipelines because of its tendency to pick up water and impurities in the line (causing higher transportation costs), it is a heavily subsidized fuel, and now it turns out that it may not be as "green" as many have been claiming.

That's not to say that there are no benefits to ethanol. Many refiners are beginning to use ethanol to replace MTBE as the oxygenating additive in gasoline, high ethanol blends usually increase horsepower, ethanol production may be more energy efficient than gasoline production, and the byproducts of ethanol production can provide high grade livestock feed.

One of the big advantages of ethanol, however, was supposed to be its environmentally friendly nature, and that might not be quite so accurate any longer. I'm all for weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels, but let's make sure that the alternatives that we plan on using are thoroughly researched and considered before implementing them as our miracle cure.

USMC 9971 OUT

Don't Freeze Your Eggs Off

Record lows are predicted for Easter this year.

It may be two weeks into spring, but it's beginning to look a lot like Christmas.

Cold temperatures in much of the country have those celebrating Easter this weekend swapping out frills, bonnets and sandals for coats, scarves and socks. Baseball fans are huddled in blankets, and instead of spring planting, backyard gardeners are bundling their crops.

The National Weather Service was predicting record lows Sunday for parts of the Southeast and Midwest, and an unseasonably cold weekend for much of the Northeast. Snow was forecast in parts of Ohio, Michigan and New England.

Don't worry, I won't make any sarcastic remarks about global warming.

USMC 9971 OUT