Who recently made the following statement?
"In fact, the life of all mankind is in danger because of global warming resulting to a large degree from the emissions of the factories of the major corporations; yet despite that, the representative of these corporations in the White House insists on not observing the Kyoto accord, with the knowledge that the statistics speak of the death and displacement of millions of human beings because of global warming, especially in Africa."
No, this quote is not from Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. It’s from Osama bin Laden’s latest rant from the cave, where reportedly his carbon footprint is very small. Certainly, Osama is producing a lot less carbon dioxide than Al Gore. Sean Hannity on Fox News recently showed video footage of Gore’s frequent flights on private jets. Earlier this year, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research reported that Gore’s house in Tennessee has a carbon footprint twenty times that of the average American’s house — and Gore owns a house in suburban Virginia as well. It’s sad to have to say it, but Al doesn’t live by his own advice. He preaches global warming salvation, but apparently he isn’t going to make it to the promised land himself.
On the other hand, Osama appears to have taken Gore’s advice to heart. He’s cut way down on his air travel, and he’s telecommuting from home. And even better than owning a Toyota Prius hybrid, it appears that he currently doesn’t own a car at all. Those are three of the big recommendations in An Inconvenient Truth. Osama appears to have adopted the ideal radical environmentalist lifestyle down to the very last detail—it really is back to the cave.
This is not to say that Osama is not just as hypocritical as Gore. While Gore plays the phony egalitarian card as expertly as the founder of his political party, Thomas Jefferson, Osama’s considerable wealth would not exist without Saudi Arabia’s enormous oil production. In the end, they are both elitists (by which I don’t mean to suggest that they are similar in all respects—Osama is an evil mass murderer) who claim to lead populist movements that will require, in Gore’s words, “a wrenching transformation of society.”
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is on a snake oil sales tour. To much fanfare, the Governator is traveling the country promoting his "California model" for fighting global warming. But he is an emperor without clothes, his vaunted California model an illusion.
Ten years ago today the U.S. Senate did something that at the time seemed significant and now seems remarkably foresightful. By a vote of 95 to 0, the Senate voted in favor of the Byrd-Hagel resolution, which expressed the Sense of the Senate on the upcoming global warming negotiations in Kyoto, Japan.
The Prius is, I think, a parable for the broader politics of global warming. Prius politics is mostly about showing off, not curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Politicians pander to "green" constituents who want to feel good about themselves. Grandiose goals are declared. But measures to achieve them are deferred — or don't exist.
Former Vice President Al Gore’s crusade against carbon dioxide emissions could make him millions of dollars. With help from friends at Goldman Sachs, Gore has established a network of organizations to promote the “climate crisis”—and keep himself in the spotlight. Gore’s crusade already has had an enormous impact on corporate decision-making and government policies. But how will it affect his personal and political fortunes?
The great danger of confronting peak oil and global warming isn't that we will sit on our collective asses and do nothing while civilization collapses, but that we will plunge after "solutions" that will make our problems even worse. Like believing we can replace gasoline with ethanol, the much-hyped biofuel that we make from corn.
It was never supposed to be a trick question. Which year is the hottest on record? Depending where one looks, there are three different answers: 2006, 1998 or 1934. Until last week, the answer was supposed to be 2006, but it might have been 1998. Now, citing corrections of faulty data, NASA says it was actually 1934. The National Climactic Data Center disagrees; it still says 1998.
Almost everyone now acknowledges that the first phase of the system – running from 2005 to 2007 – has been a failure: more permits to pollute have been printed than there is pollution. The price of carbon has collapsed to almost zero, creating no incentive to reduce pollution. As a result, UK firms covered by the scheme increased their emissions by 3.6% in the first year alone. Across the EU, emissions from installations covered by the ETS rose by just under 1%.
Last week in his blog post, New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears, on the Inhofe EPW Press Blog, Marc Morano cited a July 2007 review of 539 abstracts in peer-reviewed scientific journals from 2004 through 2007 that found that climate science continues to shift toward the views of global warming skeptics.
Increasing production of biofuels to combat climate change will release between two and nine times more carbon gases over the next 30 years than fossil fuels, according to the first comprehensive analysis of emissions from biofuels.
RSS Updates 
RSS E-Mail Updates 
CEI.org