“DON’T ASK HOW TO PAY FOR CLIMATE CHANGE. ASK WHO”… Shouldn’t we ask why first?

By David Middleton – Re-Blogged From WUWT

HENRY FARRELL
SCIENCE
08.02.1909:00 AM
DON’T ASK HOW TO PAY FOR CLIMATE CHANGE. ASK WHO

LAST WEEK, CNN announced plans to host a climate crisis town hall with the Democratic presidential candidates on September 4. MSNBC scheduled a multiday climate change forum with the presidential hopefuls later that month.

In both venues, some version of the perpetual question will undoubtedly be raised: “How will you pay for the costs of dealing with climate change?”

Despite its pervasiveness, this is a profoundly wrongheaded line of inquiry. Asking how to pay for the impact of climate change implies that these costs are a matter of choice. The reality is that global warming will impose massive costs, regardless of whether policymakers respond or not. Thus, the real question is not “How would you propose to pay?” but instead “Who is going to pay?” and “How much?

[…]

Wired

Continue reading

Advertisements

“Clean Power Plan” is replaced by the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule

Re-Blogged From WUWT

Confirmed – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Issues New Clean Air Rule

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Issues New Clean Air Rule

The July issue of Environment & Climate News reports that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it has formally replaced the prior administration’s Clean Power Plan (CPP) with the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, which EPA proposed as a CPP replacement last August.

“We are delivering on one of President Trump’s core priorities: ensuring the American’s public has access to affordable, reliable energy in a manner that continues our nation’s environmental progress,” said Andrew Wheeler, Administrator of the EPA.

Continue reading

ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE NEWS

[This is one good article from the Heartland’s Journal. It’s worth your time tolook at the whole Journal. -Bob ]

By Duggan Flanakin – Re-Blogged From Heartland Institute
The U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) has identified the steps it is taking to improve transparency and public input for legal settlements it is considering.A memo from Daniel Jorjani, principal deputy solicitor at DOI, explains what the department is doing to insti-tute then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zin-ke’s 2018 directive to stop entering into secret “sue-and-settle” agreements.Regulatory ShortcutEnvironmental lobbyists often sue vari-ous agencies, including DOI, to force them to implement policies they favor without going through the normally required regulatory process.Under previous presidential admin-istrations, federal agencies have often agreed to legally binding settlement agreements or consent decrees, creat-ing priorities and rules and establish-ing timelines for action outside of the normal rulemaking process.

Continue reading

EPA’S Adoption of LNT for Cancer Risk Assessment

By Edward J. Calabresea, & Robert J. Golden – Re-Blogged From Junk Science

1. IntroductionThe US Congress passed, and President Richard Nixon signed intolaw the Safe Drinking Water Act in 1974. A significant provision of theAct involved engaging the US NAS to advise the EPA on multiple sci-entific and technical areas such as chemical and radiation risk assess-ment, including cancer risk assessment. To achieve these goals the NAScreated the Safe Drinking Water Committee (SDWC) in 1975. In 1977the SDWC published the 700 pageDrinking Water and Health[1] reportoffering EPA widespread guidance, including cancer risk assessmentand its underlying scientific foundations that supported the LNT.Within two years EPA would issue the first national drinking waterstandard for a chemical carcinogen using the LNT for total trihalo-methanes (THM) [2]. This action would jump start an avalanche ofother LNT based cancer risk assessments by EPA, not just for drinkingwater but for other environmental media as well.

Continue reading

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #366

The Week That Was: July 6, 2019, Brought to You by www.SEPP.org

By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them.” – George Orwell [H/t John Dunn]

Number of the Week: 2012

Beauty in Physics: On his web site, The Reference Frame, string theorist Lubos Motl had a long post reporting his search for the terms beautiful, beauty, and pretty in the Feynman Lectures on Physics (1963). Richard Feynman was a co-recipient of the 1965 Nobel Prize in Physics for his work in Quantum Electrodynamics and an exceptional lecturer who insisted on teaching students introductory physics. Perhaps it is his expression of finding exceptional explanations of complex problems beautiful that makes Feynman’s lecturers so memorable. Fortunately, they are available to read online. One of the many examples Molt gives is on Kepler’s laws:

Here are the promised Kepler’s laws.

Continue reading

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #364

The Week That Was: June 22, 2019, Brought to You by www.SEPP.org

By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project

The Greenhouse Effect – It’s Simple Physics – NOT: One of the disturbing characteristics of many politicians, “experts” on climate science, and even established scientific organizations is to talk about the greenhouse effect as simple physics. It is not. It is a complex process that has been ongoing for billions of years with varying concentrations of atmospheric gases, that have changed significantly. Human emissions of carbon dioxide are not changing the atmosphere to something that has not existed before. One cannot be certain, but the early atmosphere may have been mostly of carbon dioxide, along with smaller amounts of methane, ammonia, nitrogen and water vapor. Today, “dry” atmosphere (from which all water has been removed) is about 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 1% argon and 0.4% carbon dioxide. (Due to rounding, numbers may not equal 100%.)

Of course, dry air only exists in a laboratory, and any calculations based on dry air must be verified by observations. Unfortunately, such necessary observations are ignored by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its followers such as the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). Instead, these organizations add an assumed influence of the importance of water vapor, not one based on observations.

Continue reading

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #361

The Week That Was: By Ken Haapala, President, SEPP

Brought to You by www.SEPP.org, The Science and Environmental Policy Project

Quote of the Week: “It is a pleasure to stand upon the shore, and to see ships tost [sic] upon the sea: a pleasure to stand in the window of the castle and to see the battle and the adventures thereof below: but no pleasure is comparable to the standing upon the vantage ground of truth ( a hill not to be commanded and where the air is always clear and serene), and to see the errors, and wanderings, and mists, and tempests, in the vale below. – From Of Truth, Francis Bacon [H/t Numberwatch, hopefully returning]

Number of the Week: 5 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) of LNG, which is equal to about 0.7 billion [standard, normal temperature and pressure] cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of natural gas

The Greenhouse Effect –Atmospheric Layers: The atmosphere is divided into distinct layers and the altitude of the layers depends on the latitude, the distance from the equator. One could think of an oval shape with the thickest (elongated) part being above the equator. (Seasonal variation will be ignored in this section.)

Continue reading