Climate deniers in Congress refuse to even debate the issue. Make sure they don't get away with it: http://OFA.BO/EgU96n
The science on climate change is clear.
But many members of Congress are in complete denial, and they're standing in the way of progress.
We need to call them out.
Watch this embarrassing video—and join the fight to get serious on climate change:
Of course, the President has a significant decision on the Keystone Pipeline coming up soon. Money/Mouth
Oh, yes, in addition, Willard wants Eli to call attention to a notice from the Association of Honest Brokers, two of whom trampled on reality today in the US Congress
Just in: The Association of Honest Brokers Cries Foul
Today’s statement of Environment Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart (R-Utah) contains the presence of the LINEAR MODEL.
It is also important to recognize that the direction we choose to
take on climate change is not resolvable by science alone. Once the
scientific analysis is complete, we must then make value judgments and
economic decisions based on a real understanding of the costs and
benefits of any proposed actions. It is through this lens that we
should review the President’s forthcoming executive actions and proposed
regulations
By consensual assessment, The Association recommends (but not imposes) a meeting with the nearest honest broker to correct what could lead to the conceptual corruption of the policy making process.
"Of course, the President has a significant decision on the Keystone Pipeline coming up soon. Money/Mouth"
The rabbit should prepare himself for disappointment because Obama is almost certainly going to approve this pipeline.
Aside from the point that the oil would just come from somewhere else and the impact on U.S. and international GHG emissions would be minimal (the refineries that seek out bitumen would also happily take Venezuelan heavy crude or other heavy crudes in its place, which aren't any better wrt GHG emissions), but the large majority of Americans want to see this pipeline built. Further, Obama would risk alienating many Democratic congress-critters who sit in the middle and a few Republicans who might be there too.
Politically, it'd be a killer to turn this down. He'd hand over a huge amount of ammunition to the Republicans to use in the next round of Senate and House elections. And then he'd have even less support than he has now (and he needs every bit he can get when it comes to tackling U.S. emissions)
Does this mean he can't take action otherwise? Hell no. The EPA is already taking steps through going after coal-fired power plants, going after oil and gas field emissions, and going after better fuel economy. The DOE is a powerful force in improving renewable technologies. He's got some great tools at his disposal that'll help pave the way for the day when legislative action can actually happen.
I'd be the happiest person in the world if they built this pipe and it sat there empty (or other pipes were empty/emptying). Why? Because it would man that consumption was actually changing, which is what the U.S. actually needs.
Stopping Keystone would be a feel-good win and a very big symbolic gesture, and I wish the world was so simple that stopping this pipeline would be a true, practical solution, but I don't think it'd be a platform from which Obama could make further constructive change. In fact, I think it'd be regressive.
Venezuelan production peaked in ~2000, Trinidad and Tobago has been declining since ~1980 and they have their own refinery. So where is that extra oil you talk about going to come from?
Obama has been hippy punching for the last five years, but sooner or later he is going to run out of supporters.
Venezuela's oil production didn't peak because of lack of oil, it peaked because of political interference in its oil and gas operations. I.e. there's no shortage of heavy oil resources in the country.
There's Saudi Arabia. There's Iraq. Russia. Others. There's lots of heavy oil in the world.
If I got most of ny new from Fox and considered it a very credible source, I would agree with the GOP deniers. As a scientist I know that "the news" is not a reliable source of information about science and that Fox seems to get everything wrong.
Eli Rabett, a not quite failed professorial techno-bunny who finally handed in the keys and retired from his wanna be research university. The students continue to be naive but great people and the administrators continue to vary day-to-day between homicidal and delusional without Eli's help. Eli notices from recent political developments that this behavior is not limited to administrators. His colleagues retain their curious inability to see the holes that they dig for themselves. Prof. Rabett is thankful that they, or at least some of them occasionally heeded his pointing out the implications of the various enthusiasms that rattle around the department and school. Ms. Rabett is thankful that Prof. Rabett occasionally heeds her pointing out that he is nuts.
Barack Obama
Posts
Today’s statement of Environment Subcommittee Chairman Chris Stewart (R-Utah) contains the presence of the LINEAR MODEL.
http://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/HHRG-113-%20SY18-WState-S001192-20120425.pdf
By consensual assessment, The Association recommends (but not imposes) a meeting with the nearest honest broker to correct what could lead to the conceptual corruption of the policy making process.
And finally, Scrotum reports from New Zealand where the forces of the James Hansen Kombat Brigade Antipodean Division have turkey trussed Chris Monckton and made off with the package.