Obama signals new focus on climate change

[petros]

Hmmm apparently NG is $2.39 gallon in Baaaaawston. Complain to the Kennedys!

I called this btw. March if he's got the balls to back up his position on reducing carbon emissions.

March is when the frost is done with and pipelines start. Now that the "energy corridor" is finalized, a few more will be announced. If it's safe for one, it's even safer for 10.

 

[EagleSmack]

Hmmm apparently NG is $2.39 gallon in Baaaaawston. Complain to the Kennedys!

.

The Kennedy's don't have a complaint department.

 

[petros]

The Kennedy's don't have a complaint department.

Not even any thugs down at the Knights of Columbus Tuesday bingo?

 

[EagleSmack]

Not even any thugs down at the Knights of Columbus Tuesday bingo?

Not usually a good idea to complain to their thugs... and there are a lot.

 

[petros]

Crime families always do.

 

[darkbeaver]

I called this btw.

Obama delayed his response on Keystone because he wanted to secure his second term before making the decision. He wasted no time in going back to the pivotal issue once he was voted back in. We'll see in March if he's got the balls to back up his position on reducing carbon emissions.

He's commitment to carbon reductions is proved beyond doubt by the steady growth and development of drone attacks on carbon emitting targets.

 

[mentalfloss]

So.....oil from the middle east produce less emissions than oil from Canada.....hmmmm...does anyone get this????

Is it easier to avoid a new project than to cancel existing ones?

Yes.

Which is why we would be saddled with both sources of emissions.

And it's also why your Ezra argument is poop.
--

Also..

Wuh oh spaghettios..

Kerry dodges Keystone pipeline question - The Globe and Mail

 

[EagleSmack]

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) not giving a straight answer! Say it isn't so!

 

[petros]

Is it easier to avoid a new project than to cancel existing ones?

Yes.

Which is why we would be saddled with both sources of emissions.

Dude! They are tapping into their heavy oil now too. Google a little and see what is going on there right now and why OPEC pegged oil at $100ish a barrel for the past 3 years to pay for the biggest oil project the world has ever seen.

Anybody who isn't working in a call center in India is working in the Middle East ramping up output in Saudia Arabia,other Arabs, Africa and rebuilding southern Iraq.

I know you weren't around last time OPEC played games on our economy. It's what kicked off the oil sands to begin with. This time we had the leap and forced them to invest their whole nut on deep heavy crude.

Don't worry, you'll get your green electric urban buggy and $15 a year to operate gas fireplace and piss poor frequency wind power that ruins electronics before their time. It will happen when our oil flows to EU and Asia we'll be able to afford all the green goodies.

Gasoline and heating oil use is going to plummet. NG will skyrocket

There are far better and more valuable products from oil than gasoline for cars. Equipment and Global logistics needs diesel and bunker. It's pointless wasting Saudi sweet on it. .

The more products that can be made from bbl of oil the more valuable it is.

I'll let you in on something.

There is a mineral far more valuable than oil, uranium, copper, silver, gold or platinum that decides a Nations worth than all of the latter combined.

Sulphur.

 

[coldstream]

I've heard some pundits describe this as Dead On Arrival.. the whole AGW movement is so dicredited by its own lies... and underlying philosophy deeply antithetical to the human cause.. especially in presenting solutions that will make it impossible for the world to sustain even its present population.. that is has lost its audience .. with the exception of radical environmentalists, a few hollywood movie stars.. AND the mainstream press.

But these fanatics are rabid in support of their cause. Since the world clearly is NOT warming.. they've switched the message to Climate Change... that way they can take credit for any weather.. cold, hot or status quo.. storms, heat or cold waves. If the world was really warming we should be seeing a reduction in the severity of storms, and a levelling of the temperature variances that cause them. Some have even proffered that tsunamis and eathquakes are carbon related.

The fact that it is all UTTER NONSENSE.. without any scientific credibility whatsoever doesn't phase them.. these are, after all, ideological zealots.. in the thrall of a pagan Earth Goddess.. and NOT scientists.

Whenever you hear the 'protect our children' rationale.. whether its for AGW or the imposition of vicious economic austerity... or the so called 'debt' crisis.. BEWARE.. you are in the cross hairs of FRAUDSTERS who have an undisclosed agenda.. and have NO interest what so ever in 'future generations'.. only their own ideology. ONLY those in league with that agenda.. and political mediocrities and simpletons like Obama will support them.

 

[EagleSmack]

CS... there is so much money to be gained from the hand selected Developed Nations on the hit list. They are now in so deep and billions of dollars are at stake. They will never turn back and will keep pounding.

Think about it... you can pollute as much as you want providing you pay a carbon tax and the money is distributed to other "developing nations". How does that save the world from doom?

Nations with a developing nation status are free to grow as much as they want because western nations have had successful economies for years. When in fact they GW crowd KNOWS FOR A FACT that China will never EVER stunt their growth nor pay a dime. Nor India, Brazil, etc. China is going to pass the US as the world's biggest economy and they still have a developing nation status from that crowd.

 

[L Gilbert]

Obama signals new focus on climate change

WASHINGTON — After President Obama finished his inaugural speech Monday, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills) thanked him for mentioning climate change, a topic environmentalists said Obama had avoided during much of his first term.

"I did more than mention climate change," the president told Waxman.

In discussing the urgency of climate change before a national audience, the president elevated the issue into the top tier of second-term priorities that include fiscal reform, gun control and immigration reform.

"We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations," he said Monday. "Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and more powerful storms."

Many environmentalists have come to believe that Obama's more frequent, detailed mentions of climate change since the election could signal a greater willingness to step up reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

The president isn't ruling out the idea of a legislative package to combat climate change during his second term, senior officials say. But the political landscape is even less favorable to passage of legislative initiatives than during his first term.

In the near term, Obama will probably rely on his executive authority and Environmental Protection Agency rules to avoid fights with Congress as he works to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, the main driver of climate change.

"I think the president isn't just about talk," said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.). The administration, she added, has "no choice but to act."

Despite Obama's public reticence on climate change during his first term, his administration moved aggressively on several fronts to cut emissions of carbon dioxide. The administration contends that its first-term rules to boost gas mileage and curtail greenhouse gases from new power plants will have a demonstrable effect on carbon emissions.

The auto standards alone "did more to reduce carbon pollution than any other action that has been taken, in our view," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday. "We need to continue to build on that, and the president intends to continue to build on that progress in the second term."

Supporters and opponents alike are looking for clues about Obama's posture in upcoming decisions. The final rules for greenhouse gas limits from new power plants are due by April. It remains unclear whether the EPA will then roll out new rules for existing power plants, most of which run on fossil fuels. The emissions from existing plants account for almost 40% of the greenhouse gases the country produces.

The administration has also said that it could make a decision by March about approving the controversial Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the U.S. Gulf Coast. Environmentalists contend that extracting and processing the oil from Alberta's tar sands use so much energy, far more carbon would be pumped into the atmosphere if oil fields were developed to feed the pipeline.

If the Obama administration decides not to give the pipeline a permit, it would be in for a tough fight with those in Congress who would try to legislate approval for the project, said Trip Van Noppen, president of Earthjustice, an environmental law group.

Obama signals new focus on climate change - Los Angeles Times

Oh, great! More wingnut ideas about how to cut back on human impacts.

We shoveled the snow off our new deck again. Along with the snow went chips of paint. When I bought the stuff, it was supposed to be stain, like it says on the cans (stain soaks into the wood, paint doesn't). I went to the dealer and said so. The explanation I got was that the gov't wants people to quit using stain because of the impact on the environment so water-based paint is termed as stain now. So, now I have to write some idiots in gov't and explain that there's also an impact on the environment from making this water-based crap, and it also causes people to apply new coats of the crap every year if they want their deck to keep looking decent (which can get pretty damned expensive after a few years), etc. Also, stain preserves wood. Paint won't. As soon as there's a scratch, a chip, a crack in it, the wood starts deteriorating relatively quickly, which i turn causes you to replace the wood earlier than if you had applied stain. And the lumber industry has its own set of impacts.

These dipsticks coming up with all these fancy ideas don't seem to think very deeply about them.

 

[damngrumpy]

Going this route is nonsense, climate change is as sure as the tides it has been happening
for millions of years. Besides we won't be buying oil from the Middle East or perhaps even
the oil sands. We will being buying from Australia. Yesterday they announced a find in the
south of Australia this is the biggest find in generations and worth trillions. It is another that
is bigger than the Saudi fields.
No matter this might solve the problem for us, we will have and do have lots of oil in places
other than the Middle East. When we are done getting what we want, we can quarantine
them. OK I am joking.
The fact is we have billions of barrels of the stuff and we will be using oil long after we are all
dead and gone. Carbon Credits and all this stuff is to focus our attention to the fact the whole
world economy is a mess. It is restructured to have rich people and poor people serving the
interests of rich people, and the middle class, there won't be any