Enervated Press–May 21, 2018
Washington, D.C.—Disputes continue after the Supreme Court‘s six-month-old order giving a year to evacuate a fifteen-mile-wide zone on both sides of the Potomac River. The ruling relied on a George Mason University study finding the Potomac Valley to be the only known habitat of Anopheles caducum, a mosquito species long thought to be extinct. The affected zone runs from Point of Rocks, Maryland, to Chesapeake Bay.
In a recent clarification, the court also banned mosquito-eradication efforts. Although the Public Health Service made no official comment on the ruling, it had previously supported eradication, because A. caducum is known to carry an often-lethal fever. Fever cases have increased in tandem with habitat-restoration efforts, and restoration slowed as workers have fallen ill. The plaintiffs, Friends of the Anopheles, threatened to seek a contempt order. In response, the general contractor offered plaintiffs an inspection tour on any evening after a rain.
Congress has been unable to settle where to relocate the seat of government, so elements of the government will likely be divided among all Congressional districts having a representative from the majority party. Both parties, however, overwhelmingly voted to move both Congress and the White House to Las Vegas, explaining that the opportunity to work as Congressional pages would benefit the aspiring-show-girl community. One of the few dissenters complained that locating in Las Vegas might leave Congressmen having to gamble with their own money. The leadership released a joint statement, asking “What are the chances of that?”
To further address the objection, a bill is pending that would levy a special casino tax on winnings from members of Congress. Gaming lobbyists have complained the tax would make it cheaper for casinos to rig games so Congressmen could consistently win. The House Speaker’s official response reads, in part, “What’s their point?”
Relocating the federal courts has become rancorous. Tension heightened when Justice Scalia reported seeing Justice Sotomayor swat a mosquito as she waited for a taxi. “She just swatted it like a bug,” he said.
The Senate Minority Leader, refusing to support appropriations for court relocation, suggested that federal judges might want to cash in their investments to buy insect repellent. “Either that or they might ask for professional courtesy from their fellow blood suckers,” he said.
Buying repellent is complicated by the injunction against its sale in any state bordering the Potomac. In issuing the injunction, the court relied on expert testimony that repellent interferes with the feeding habits of A. caducum. But repellent may still be obtained from local drug dealers, who will sell a small bottle for $25 if coupled with the purchase of a vial of crack. Federal agents recently intercepted another turbo-charged Dodge Challenger running repellant out of the Tennessee mountains. Experts say such trafficking is an increasing problem. Employment is up as skilled mechanics flock to Appalachia for jobs reworking engines. And some repellent runners are already transitioning to successful NASCAR careers.
The environmental community is deeply divided. Some prominent spokespersons have supported eradication. Others agree with Penelope Barker of the Fund for the Animals, who cautions against species-centrism. “We have no right to extinguish an entire mosquito species merely to reduce human disease,” she said. During Ms. Barker’s committee testimony, a long-time senator from Virginia offered her the use of his Tidewater retreat, “in the summer when them bugs should be out right good.”
The National Wildlife Federation, whose headquarters is in the affected area, blasted the opinion for grossly misconstruing the law. The Federation President said, “Discovery revealed that, over several years, the Koch brothers poured more than a million dollars into endangered-species research. It took exhaustive work for their investigators to find A. caducum. The Koch brothers only wanted leverage against Washington and didn’t really care about mosquitoes.”
The court, however, ruled that the species’ existence mattered more than the motivation for the research. Apparently encouraged, the Koch brothers are said to be funding research into a plague-bearing flea once common in southern Nevada.
During the same committee session, Republicans announced future hearings on the environmental peril arising from the Federal Register. “The print version depletes our national forests, and even the electrons necessary to support a digital version are too much for a society trying to reduce its carbon footprint,” one senator said.
RISING ONCE AGAIN FROM THE BOWELS OF CONGRESS: LATEST CLIMATE BILL (updated: May 16, 2010)
The bill has been published as of Thursday the 13th. initial comments from the American Thinker.
Bloomberg reports, “Climate-Change Bill Avoids ‘Cap-and-Trade’ Tag in U.S. Senate.”
“Now Graham, John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut are preparing to introduce a compromise bill in the Senate. They have indicated it will include a mandatory, declining limit on carbon emissions in the electric-power industry while giving utilities the right to buy and sell carbon allowances. “The senators aren’t calling it ‘cap-and-trade,’ though. The legislation is about ‘pricing carbon,’ Graham told reporters in Washington last month.” (emphasis added)
“A cap and trade program first sets an aggressive cap, or maximum limit, on emissions. Sources covered by the program then receive authorizations to emit in the form of emissions allowances, with the total amount of allowances limited by the cap. Each source can design its own compliance strategy to meet the overall reduction requirement, including the sale or purchase of allowances, installation of pollution controls, and implementation of efficiency measures, among other options.” (emphasis added)
The sponsors of the bill can call it a Clean Energy and Security Bill (tried that), the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Bill (tried that), or the Clean American Jobs and Low Energy Prices Bill (guess for the new name) but it won’t change the fact that it is going to cap emissions and require companies trade emission credits (for at least utilities and manufacturing).
It is therefore, at root, a cap-and-trade bill. And as we all know, under President Obama’s cap-and-trade plan, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. It is still unclear how the bill will reduce emissions from transportation, the source of 33% of energy-related emissions. A gas tax (whether imposed on consumers or to the companies themselves) would be ineffective.
All the above rate increases and taxing is in response to the false premise of man-caused global warming.
ACTION PLAN: To be posted after bill is published, and we have had a chance to review it. Hang in there! We want to get it right. The bill has been published as of Thursday the 13th. Initial comments from the American Thinker.
The Weatherman, Dexter Wright, Digs Deep into the Climategate
Michael Mann’s “Hockey Stick” challenged by Virginia Attorney General.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot filing in federal court a challenge to the EPAs’s endangerment finding stating that it was based on the now discredited IPCC report–fraudlent science!
Whoever leaked the incriminating e-mails deserves a medal for saving the U.S. economy from certain ruin.
The British Parlament has convened hearings to investigate East Anglia University and the Climate Research Unit to uncover “unethical” and ”illegal” activities.
The Jones Gang, “Forget credentials and just get signatures.” Opponents speak out and have been speaking out: Heidelberg Appeal (4000 scientists,72 Nobel Prize winners), Leipzig Declaration (reputable scientists), and the Oregon Petition (31,000 scientists). And still the Jones Gang persists!
Evidence that the climate computer models have failed.
An effort to distort and discredit solar impact on climate. Solar flares track with global warming.
A case “discrediting proxy tree data” in the Mann “hockey stick” graph depicting global warming.
Distorting facts that are inconvenient to a desired conclusion.
The U.S. government is prepared to provide up to $10 billion in loans to finance the development of massive hydrocarbon reserves off Brazil’s coast.
President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, Gen. James Jones, discussed the matter with officials this week during a visit to the South American country, Brazilian Planning Minister Paulo Bernardo da Silva told reporters.
He said the U.S. Export-Import Bank already has signed a letter of intent in that regard with Brazilian state oil company Petrobras.
The loan is equal in value to a similar credit line agreed to with the China Development Bank, also for exploiting Brazil’s “pre-salt” area, so-named because the estimated 80 billion barrels of high-quality crude in that new oil frontier lie far beneath the ocean floor under layers of rock and an unstable salt formation.
Under the agreement with the Chinese state bank, finalized during Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s visit to Beijing in May, Brazil can repay the loan facility with oil as opposed to cash.
According to the government’s projections, the pre-salt reserves – located at a depth of up to seven kilometers (4.3 miles) below the ocean surface in an 800-kilometer by 200-kilometer area – could eventually lead to a nearly six-fold increase in Brazil’s current proven reserves of 14 billion barrels and transform that nation into one of the world’s 10 largest oil producers and a major crude exporter.
Petrobras plans to invest close to $29 billion through 2013 to develop the pre-salt deposits in which the company already holds concession rights.
Petrobras is projecting that some 1.3 million barrels per day can be extracted by 2013 from the pre-salt fields and 1.8 million bpd by 2020.
The Tupi field, which is believed to contain between 5 billion and 8 billion barrels of oil and was the first to be exploited in the pre-salt region, is considered to be the largest hydrocarbon discovery in the Americas in the past 30 years.
Other large oil and natural gas fields were later found nearby, also under a thick bed of salt.
But Brazil has been forced to seek external financing because the fields pose an enormous technical and financial challenge due to the depth and thickness of the salt and the drastic changes in temperature as the oil is brought to the surface.
Acknowledging that Petrobras alone is not capable of developing the massive pre-salt reserves, Brazil announced in May that it will invite international oil companies to bid for concessions in that region beginning next year.
The country had previously halted the sale of concessions after the massive finds were made.
Petrobras, an integrated energy company and the global leader in deepwater oil exploration and production, operates in 27 countries in the Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe.
Shares of Petrobras, Brazil’s largest corporation, trade on the Sao Paulo, New York, Madrid and Buenos Aires stock exchanges, but the Brazilian government retains control through a golden share.
The outgoing leader of Greenpeace has admitted his organization’s recent claim that the Arctic Ice will disappear by 2030 was “a mistake.” Greenpeace made the claim in a July 15 press release entitled “Urgent Action Needed As Arctic Ice Melts,” which said there will be an ice-free Arctic by 2030 because of global warming.
Under close questioning by BBC reporter Stephen Sackur on the “Hardtalk” program, Gerd Leipold, the retiring leader of Greenpeace, said the claim was wrong.
“I don’t think it will be melting by 2030. … That may have been a mistake,” he said.
Sackur said the claim was inaccurate on two fronts, pointing out that the Arctic ice is a mass of 1.6 million square kilometers with a thickness of 3 km in the middle, and that it had survived much warmer periods in history than the present.
The BBC reporter accused Leipold and Greenpeace of releasing “misleading information” and using “exaggeration and alarmism.”
Leipold’s admission that Greenpeace issued misleading information is a major embarrassment to the organization, which often has been accused of alarmism but has always insisted that it applies full scientific rigor in its global-warming pronouncements.
Although he admitted Greenpeace had released inaccurate but alarming information, Leipold defended the organization’s practice of “emotionalizing issues” in order to bring the public around to its way of thinking and alter public opinion.
Leipold said later in the BBC interview that there is an urgent need for the suppression of economic growth in the United States and around the world. He said annual growth rates of 3 percent to 8 percent cannot continue without serious consequences for the climate.
“We will definitely have to move to a different concept of growth. … The lifestyle of the rich in the world is not a sustainable model,” Leipold said. “If you take the lifestyle, its cost on the environment, and you multiply it with the billions of people and an increasing world population, you come up with numbers which are truly scary.”
(You can watch the full BBC interview with Leipold here, and to learn more about Greenpeace-style global warming hysteria and its potential toll on the American dream, go to www.noteviljustwrong.com, the Web site for the forthcoming documentary “Not Evil Just Wrong,” by Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney.)