It may be a dirty world, but under the glittering chandeliers of the Waldorf-Astoria's grand ballroom, more than 500 guests at a black tie $1,500-a-plate banquet last week were told they could sup with a clean conscience. The occasion was a "green" dinner, devoted to celebrating "climate heroes." Carbon offsets had been purchased for their travel to the event.
During the early 1970s we were told by the promoters of nuclear energy that by the year 2000 America’s coal-based electricity generation plants would be relics of the past and that all electricity would come from nuclear fission. What’s more, we were told that the first generation fission reactors would by then be on their way out, replaced by super-efficient breeder reactors that would produce more fuel than they were initially charged with.
EU countries may agree before the end of the year on the basic principles and structure of an agreement on the European Commission's energy and climate package, but it is unlikely that a deal will be finalised, an ambassador of one of the bloc's 27 member states told EurActiv.
This is “Green Week,” NBC’s annual effort to show you how to “green your routine.” It sounds innocuous enough, but “Green Week” is actually part of a manipulative business strategy employed by General Electric (GE), the owner of NBC.
GE is a world leader in the production of clean energy goods and services that people don’t want to buy, like compact fluorescent light bulbs. That’s why it spends millions every year to convince the Congress to pass laws like last year’s energy bill, which forces consumers to buy compact fluorescent light bulbs.
Generally speaking, Americans don’t like being told what to do, so GE uses “Green Week” to propagate global warming alarmism and frighten Americans into accepting rules and regulations that force them to buy GE products.
Yesterday, Today Show co-host Meredith Vieira told viewers that global warming could cause sea levels to rise 200 feet. But that’s not what the experts are saying. Under its worst-case scenario, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that Sea levels would rise by 27 inches over the next 100 years. So Meredith was off by 99%.
Today, Meredith conducted an interview with an Antarctic ecosystem ecologist, who said that the bad news is that ice was melting on one side of Antarctica. Meredith then asked whether it was good news that ice mass was increasing on the other side of Antarctica. The ecologist replied that it was indeed bad news, because increasing ice meant that animals had to travel further to get food. When it comes to global warming, there can be no upside, at least not during Green Week.
Today Show weatherman Al Roker reported from Iceland, and he did a segment on that island’s success with geothermal energy. He finished his piece by noting that the U.S. could get 10 percent of its energy needs from clean, geothermal energy. Conveniently, General Electric, which owns NBC, just so happens to be a leader in the manufacture of conventional open cycle steam turbines used for geothermal power.
Italy and Germany agree that measures to cut greenhouse gases shouldn't weigh on the economy, Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel said at a press conference Tuesday, indicating government support for tough new measures in Europe is waning.
"Building on (California's) success in forming de facto treaties with international entities, Schwarzenegger will sign a declaration with Indonesia and Brazil to develop efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation. The agreement could make it cheaper for California businesses to achieve emissions reductions by allowing them to invest in afforestation projects abroad," according to E and E today.
But the guilt-laden Californians will be doing more harm than good. The countries where they will supposedly be investing in forests have proven records for corruption. Brazil tied with China and India on the 2006 Transparency International Perceptions of Corruption Index. And Indonesia tied with that paragon of virtue, Russia, at number 143.
Who will really profit from the boatloads of money California sends these countries?
Developing countries are worried that they would face increased expectations to commit to economically harmful emissions reductions if President-elect Barack Obama follows through with a campaign promise to align with the European Union and orchestrate a global response to global warming. To date, developing countries have faced little diplomatic pressure to act on the climate because the Bush administration refused to commit to an international climate treaty. As a result, the EU has spent its diplomatic capital trying to convince the U.S. to join and largely has ignored developing countries, even though they account for half of current emissions. If, however, President-elect Obama reversed the Bush administration’s international climate strategy, a united EU-U.S. would likely demand that developing countries commit to steep emissions cuts. So it’s no wonder that China and India chose the week after Obama’s victory in the presidential elections to demonstrate their unwillingness to put global warming over economic growth. China’s government unveiled their climate plan this week. The centerpiece is to exact a commitment from developed countries to give 1% of their GDP—about $300 billion annually—to building a clean energy infrastructure in China and other developing countries. India’s government held a conference in New Delhi, called Climate Change: Business Sustainability and Society, during which Science and Technology Minister Kapil Sibal announced that a global action plan to fight climate change was unworkable.
Nigel Lawson, chancellor of the Exchequer under Margaret Thatcher, and author of three books–including his essential account of the Thatcher years, The View from No. 11: Memoirs of a Tory Radical–had trouble finding a publisher for his most recent book, An Appeal to Reason, which casts a skeptical eye on global warming.
A new Irish film claims that climate change guru Al Gore is an alarmist and that those who think they are saving the planet are only hurting the poor
Economists often talk about "revealed preferences." If Uncle Stu says that he wants to watch his weight but continues to gorge himself like a wild boar, it's clear that his preference to eat outweighs any desire to drop a few pounds.
RSS Updates 
RSS E-Mail Updates 
CEI.org