|
See tagline
Gore/Enron, Enron/Gore
Interesting
|
Ironic that the big corporate money was behind Kyoto. Relatively, it was a very tiny amount that industry put to be skeptical of global warming.
Enron/James Hansen
When will NPR next remind people of that St. Hansen is/was an Enron flack?
Never I bet.
“About 20 years ago Enron was owner and operator of an interstate network of natural gas pipelines, and had transformed itself into a billion-dollar-a-day commodity trader, buying and selling contracts and their derivatives to deliver natural gas, electricity, internet bandwidth, whatever. The 1990 Clean Air Act amendments authorized the Environmental Protection Agency to put a cap on how much pollutant the operator of a fossil-fueled plant was allowed to emit. In the early 1990s Enron had helped establish the market for, and became the major trader in, EPA’s $20 billion-per-year sulphur dioxide cap-and-trade program, the forerunner of today’s proposed carbon credit trade. This commodity exchange of emission allowances caused Enron’s stock to rapidly rise.
Then came the inevitable question, what next? How about a carbon dioxide cap-and-trade program? The problem was that CO2 is not a pollutant, and therefore the EPA had no authority to cap its emission.”
This is from an article published 3/16/07 and written earlier; the author had no idea that the Court would declare CO2 a pollutant as it now has.
This should be published worldwide in light of this new fact.
Hence, time to start making deals and compromises with environmental wackos to get them to shut up about global warming!
Another case where it’s wise to “follow the money”.
"One of Enron’s major consultants in that study was NASA scientist James Hansen, who started the whole global warming mess in 1988 with his bombastic congressional testimony."
You mean this James Hansen?
"Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have been appropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of the global warming issue, and energy sources such as "synfuels," shale oil and tar sands were receiving strong consideration."
-- James Hansen, stated in presentation to Council on Environmental Quality, June 12, 2003
Subject: Protect technological civilization. Fight global warming alarmists.
Hi Mr. Johnson,
I received my Ph.D. from the Biological Sciences Division of the University of Chicago in 2001. I did my thesis and post-doctoral work in neurobiology. I have been following environmental affairs now since the early 1970's. I am appalled at the sheer level of hysteria over global warming that is being fomented through the news broadcasts and in popular science venues. This dwarfs anything seen in the great cancer scare of the 1970s and it has even less scientific foundation than that.
I urge you not to follow in the footsteps of your predecessor, William Ruckelshaus, who unilaterally banned DDT and brought death and destruction to millions of people throughout the lesser-developed world.
It is known that global temperatures fluctuate widely throughout geologic time and correlate very closely with fluctuating solar output. It is known that global atmospheric CO2 levels fluctuate widely throughout geologic time and almost inversely correlate with fluctuating global temperatures (increased CO2 lags increased temperature by up to 800 years). It is known that both current CO2 levels and global temperatures are low compared to previous levels in geologic and human history. It is known that when global temperatures are higher human activity and population increases because the weather is more clement and supportive of increased agriculture. It is known that increased levels of CO2 support crop growth. Based on geological and historical records, it is known that a warmer earth is more beneficial for humans than a colder earth.
Since there is no mechanism whereby increasing and decreasing CO2 levels can affect solar output, the most likely cause/effect scenario is increased solar output leading to increased global temperatures leading to increased CO2 levels and increased human activity.
Since we are already in the latter part of the longest (and coolest) of the last 5 interglacial periods and are more likely than not, based on historical precedent, to be reentering a long period of cooling, and since in this event we will need the advanced technologies and sciences to devise ways to cope with decreasing harvests and more severe weather and climate that characterize a colder global temperature, we need to avoid situations that could adversely impact our current level of technological advancement. Tight regulation of a minor greenhouse gas that comes from activity foundational to modern society could choke the scientific innovation we'll need to meet the challenges of a cooler world.
Because of this, I urge you to resist this latest political assault on advanced Western technology that lies at the heart of the current expression of the modern environmentalist ideology. As mentioned earlier, the previous EPA-led attack on DDT resulted in increased sickness for billions and death for millions. The crusade against CO2 promises to make this outcome minuscule in comparison.
Sincerely,
THAT, I didn't know! Bump for later reading.
Gore’s carbon credits are as phony as the Nigerian e-mail scam. Sooner or later someone will investigate what happened to the carbon credit dollars and find they lined the pockets of a few people probably including Gore and that no trees were planted, windmills built or anything else environmental was done.
Read later. Thanks for posting good information.
Thanks for posting.
Wow. Wish I would have read this when it first came out. Potentially another ‘unholy alliance’. This one between Duped Environmentalist and their Sugar Daddy Corporate Overlords.
New!!: Dr. John Ray’s
GREENIE WATCH
Please ping me if you find one I’ve missed.
OKSooner and I are doing the POGW
ping list while xcamel is on vacation.
It would make a great movie.
