Category: Green Hell

New York Times columnist Tom Friedman is giving Al Gore a run for his money in the Green Hypocrisy Derby.

Friedman — known on this blog as aFraidman for ducking debate with Steve Milloy — called today for a $1-per-gallon tax on gasoline. This Orwellian “Freedom Tax,” as aFraidman called it, would be used to…

…stimulate more investment in renewable energy now; … stimulate more consumer demand for the energy-efficient vehicles that the reborn General Motors and Chrysler are supposed to make; and,… reduce our oil imports in a way that would surely affect the global price and weaken every petro-dictator.

The ever-compassionate aFraidman would allow rebates to the poor and elderly — as if such a rebate would somehow magically immunize these vulnerable groups from the higher costs the rest of us would pay and that would ripple throughout the economy. A year ago, $4-gas was choking Meals-on-Wheels services to the elderly and disabled around the country.

Since we use about 385 million gallons of gas per day, aFraidman’s “Freedom Tax” would collect about $140 billion per year — which would then be wasted on government-directed energy technology boondoggles. Remember U.S. Synfuels Corp.?

And as to being subject to the whims of petro-dictators, about 44 percent of our oil supply comes from OPEC members.

So would you rather have 44 percent of our oil supply controlled by foreign petro-dictators or 100 percent of our oil supply controlled by domestic green-dictators?

The petro-dictators must sell their oil — if they want to stay in power. The greens don’t want us using any oil at all, regardless of source.

Also, as aFraidman’s Freedom Tax would take American’s out of their cars — a technology that has allowed Americans unprecedented freedom of mobility for more than 100 years — it would actually make us less free.

Finally, Friedman, who authored the 2008 alarmist book Hot, Flat and Crowded, is married to a woman (Ann Bucksbaum) who is an heiress to a real estate and shopping mall fortune that was worth $3.2 billion in mid-2008.

Although the family fortune was reduced by mismanagement and debt to a mere $116 million by December 2008, you can bet that Friedman’s $9.3 million, 11,400 square-foot home on 7.5 acres in the tony Washington, D.C. suburb of Bethesda, Md is neither hot, flat, nor crowded.

No wonder Friedman’s aFraidman…

Waxman-Markey delenda est!

Click here to join the Green Hell Blog E-mail List!

House vote on Friday!

Click here for the full 1,201-page text.

Click here for the bill summary.

Tell your congressman that:

1. There is no climate crisis.
2. There is no need to ration energy.
3. We don’t want a green-run, centrally-planned government dictating how we live our lives.

Waxman-Markey delenda est!

It’s hard to say whether the Waxman-Markey global warming bill that will soon be debated and voted on in the House is the most intellectually- and morally-corrupt bill ever seriously considered by Congress. But I’d bet that there are 433 congressmen who are glad that this legislative atrocity is not named after them.

After years of fierce battling by greens and global warming skeptics, few Americans seem to buy into the bill’s premise — that manmade emissions of carbon dioxide are causing the planet to run a fever, as Al Gore is fond of saying. Just this week, a public relations firm advising House Democrats recommended that the notion of “global warming” be dropped as a primary message since “almost no one in our focus groups expressed such concern.”

So despite all the frantic global warming alarmism — and the vicious likening of skeptics to Holocaust-deniers by Gore and the legions of green fanatics in activist groups, the media, industry and government — the out-manned and out-gunned skeptics have largely succeeded in being heard by Americans.

Ironically, the wild claims of Gore and the greens may have actually damaged the “green” brand. The PR firm also advised dropping the term “green” since it has become “meaningless or confusing” in focus group-testing.

Though stripped of its intellectual pretense, Waxman-Markey nevertheless soldiers on to House debate and vote. How this has come to pass must be one of the great tragicomedies of American political history.

To compel Congress and industry to work together toward the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade regime, President Obama threatened both with EPA regulation of carbon dioxide, a move that would prevent Congress from reaping the political benefits of doling out $9 trillion worth of taxpayer funds to certain industries and special interest groups between 2012 and 2050. President Obama moved a step toward making good on this threat by ordering the EPA to declare carbon dioxide — what humans exhale and what plants need to grow — a threat to the public welfare.

Apparently even President Obama’s staff was somewhat embarrassed about that move. Obama climate czar Carol Browner ordered a “vow of silence” and issued an edict to “put nothing in writing ever” concerning White House staff deliberations on the matter.

When House Republicans Darrell Issa and James Sensenbrenner called for an investigation into Browner’s potentially “deliberate and willful violation” of the Presidential Records Act, Rep. Henry Waxman got Issa and Sensenbrenner to drop the subject with vague promises to “monitor the situation” and to “potentially” hold a hearing. None of Waxman supposed promises will be implemented before the House debate and vote on Waxman-Markey.

Competing for most-appalling character in the Waxman-Markey saga is Rep. Ed Markey. Immediately after the head of Warren Buffet’s electric utility unit testified against Waxman-Markey’s cap-and-trade provision, Markey fired off a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) specifically requesting that Buffet’s utility be investigated. After being rebuked by House Republicans for this blatant intimidation, Markey then asked FERC to expand the requested investigation to all investor-owned utilities, rather than appearing to single out Buffet’s. Now all utilities are under operating with a Markey-pointed gun to their heads.

Although many businesses have been coerced into supporting Waxman-Markey, much of big business has actively pushed for the bill. Many Wall Street banks hope to profit from the trading of the $9 trillion in emissions allowances to be created under Waxman-Markey. Goldman Sachs would be the preeminent global warming bookie as it owns the exchanges where carbon allowances would be traded.

General Electric, whose CEO sits on Barack Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, was instrumental in putting together the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP), a bizarre big business-environmental activist group lobbying consortium that is a primary driver of global warming legislation. USCAP has even taken credit for drafting parts of Waxman-Markey. GE, it seems, would like a federal law requiring electric utilities buy the wind turbines and other energy technologies manufactured by — guess who — GE.

Republican James Sensenbrenner recently asked the Department of Justice to investigate USCAP members General Motors and Chrysler for illegally using taxpayer bailout money to lobby for global warming legislation. AIG, the insurance giant that is now a ward of U.S. taxpayers, only dropped out of USCAP after Rep. Joe Barton pointed out the illegality of accepting federal money and then using it to lobby the federal government.

And then there’s Al Gore, who stands to become the first “carbon billionaire” through his partnership in the venture capital firm of Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers and the UK-based investment firm of Generation Investment Management. When Gore testified in favor of global warming legislation before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in January, he failed to disclose his personal financial interests and no Senator came close to asking him about them.

When he testified in April before the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee in favor of Waxman-Markey, Gore again failed to disclose his conflicts-of-interest. When Reps. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Steve Scalise (R-LA) probed into these matters, Gore feigned ignorance and pretended that he would not personally benefit from Waxman-Markey. Although Rep. Waxman made baseball players testify under oath to Congress about the comparatively petty issue of drug use in baseball, he did not subject Gore to penalty for perjury.

In addition to Waxman-Markey’s $9 trillion wealth transfer from taxpayers to special interest groups, the Brookings Institution also estimates that Americans will lose $2 trillion (present value) in purchasing power between 2010-2050. Al Gore dubiously counters that the per household cost of Waxman-Markey is about the value of a postage stamp per day.

But even that’s too much for a bill that will accomplish nothing for the environment while simultaneously making a mockery of our system of government.

Steven Milloy publishes JunkScience.com and is the author of the Amazon.com bestseller, Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them.

House Energy & Commerce Committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-Hollywood) has outsmarted House Republicans yet again.

As we reported last week, House Republicans accused Obama climate czar Carol Browner of deliberately violating the Presidential Records Act by ordering a shroud of secrecy around the development of Obama’s CAFE standards and the EPA’s CO2 endangerment finding.

To satisfy Republican demands for an investigation into Browner’s activities,  Carbon Control News reports that Waxman…

… is pledging to “monitor” and potentially hold hearings on the decision-making process behind EPA’s proposed finding that carbon dioxide endangers public health…

Carbon Control News also reported that,

Democrats… may be willing to investigate the issue given their own interest in obtaining Bush-era EPA documents…

So chalk up another victory for the wily Waxman over dim-witted congressional Republicans.

Waxman has protected Carol Browner while giving up nothing except vague promises. And if Waxman is somehow forced into investigating the Obama-Browner endangerment finding, he’ll drag the Bush administration into the investigation — something he’s wanted to do for years and something he knows House Republicans wouldn’t want to happen.

Carol Browner, an acknowledged socialist, also continues her streak of Republican-trouncing.

She single-handedly defeated congressional Republican efforts at regulatory reform in 1995, thumbed her nose at the Republican-controlled Congress in issuing the infamous junk science-fueled 1997 air quality standards and, now in 2009, has twice dodged congressional scrutiny of her White House activities — earlier this year,  she also ducked congressional confirmation hearings.

Waxman, Browner and the Democrats play to win — and win they do. I’m not sure why the Charlie Brown-like congressional Republicans play at all.

… so begins Peter Foster’s National Post review of Milloy’s new book, Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them.

Citing coming global warming legislation, Duke Energy, the third-largest U.S. utility, has asked North Carolina regulators for permission to raise electricity prices 12.6 percent. The requested price hike would cost North Carolina ratepayers $496 million.

Notable statements in Duke’s 272-page filing — and don’t miss the conservation savings — include:

“In addition to the significant costs associated with existing state and federal environmental and other regulatory requirements… we are facing expected greenhouse gas reduction requirements in the near future.”

“By 2030, the electric utility industry will need to make a total infrastructure investment of $1.5 to $2.0 trillion.”

“As much as 214 gigawatts of new generation capacity may be required by 2030, at an investment cost of $697 billion.”

“Energy efficiency and demand response programs could reduce, but will not eliminate, the need for new generation capacity.”

“All types of generation capacity are needed. For the country as a whole, every type of power plant, including those fueled by natural gas, coal, nuclear and renewable resources will play a significant role in the projected expansion plan.”

“Implementation of a new federal carbon policy will significantly increase the cost and change the mix of new generation capacity… some fossil fuel plants would be retired sooner than they otherwise would have been; and the electric industry would increase investments in renewable energy and nuclear plants.”

“The electric sector will play a large role in greenhouse gas emission reductions under a federal cap-and-trade regime. Our sector accounts for 39% of the CO2 and 33% of greenhouse gases produced in the United States – more than any other emitting sector in the country. The reduction targets will almost certainly require a transformational change in how power is generated, delivered and consumed and that transformation will be costly… Although we do not know precisely what form greenhouse gas regulation will take, the impact on our industry, our Company and our customers is expected to be substantial – particularly if utilities are required to obtain all or a substantial portion of their needed CO2 allowances in auction.”

“Greenhouse gas regulation is the fulcrum of all the major challenges we face.”

“[W]e estimate that by participating in appropriate energy conservation programs, the average North Carolina residential customer (using 1,000 kWh a month) can save about $5 per month…”

Duke CEO Jim Rogers made an appearance on Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report last night (interview starts at about 15:20).

Obama climate czar Carol Browner, accused by House Republicans last week of deliberately violating the Presidential Records Act, seems to be no stranger to abusing, possibly illegally, her government power.

In 1995 when House Republicans were pushing their “Contract With America” legislative proposals, Rep. David McIntosh (R-IN) accused then-EPA Administrator Browner of…

… breaking the law by sending out fact sheets and news releases on the bill, which is part of the Republicans’ Contract With America…

… according to the New York Times.

Federal agencies are barred by the Hatch Act from lobbying Congress on their own behalf.

The Times article laughed off the accusations since

… the law is rarely enforced…

… which is what you’d expect when the law-breakers and law-enforcers are part of the same administration.

House Republicans Darrell Issa and James Sensenbrenner are calling for an investigation of whether Obama climate czar Carol Browner’s secrecy in developing Obama’s CAFE standards and EPA’s CO2 endangerment finding was a “deliberate and willful violation” of the Presidential Records Act.

According to the letter,

… Mary Nichols, the head of the California Air Resources Board (CARB), revealed to the New York Times that the White House held a series of secret meetings with select special interests as they were crafting the new CAFE standards. Nichols was a key player in these negotiations because of California’s determined efforts to regulate fuel economy standards at the state level. Nichols admitted there was a deliberate “vow of silence”
surrounding the negotiations between the White House and California on vehicle fuel economy [standards]. According to Nichols’ interview, “[Carol] Browner [Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change] quietly orchestrated private discussions from the White House with auto industry officials.” Great care was taken to “put nothing in writing, ever.” This coordinated effort, led by Carol Browner, to leave no paper trail of the deliberations within the White House appears to be a deliberate and willful violation of the Presidential Records Act. This Act requires the President to take, “all such steps as may be necessary to assure that the activities, deliberations, decisions, and policies that reflect the performance of his constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties are adequately documented and that such records are maintained as Presidential records.” Clearly, Browner’s actions were intended to leave little to no documentation of the deliberations that lead to the development of stringent new CAFE standards.

So much for President Obama’s Jan. 21 committment to unprecedented openness in government.

Click here for the Issa/Sensenbrenner letter.

This case is not like Dick Cheney’s 2005 win-for-White-House-secrecy stemming from the 2001 lawsuit by green groups over Cheney’s refusal to release documents from the National Energy Policy Development Group under the Freedom of Information Act. In that case, a federal appeals court ruled that the NEPDG was not an agency subject to FOIA. But no one accused the NEPDG of conspiring to evade whatever record retention law might have been applicable.

Yes, this is the same Carol Browner who JunkScience.com exposed earlier this year as an official with Socialist International.

Click here for a copy of the Socialist International web page before Browner’s photo and name were scrubbed.

An appropriate historical footnote to this situation comes from a 1960 letter to Playboy from Ronald Reagan about his awakening to communism, as retold by James Mann in The Rebellion of Ronald Reagan (Viking Press, 2009):

What bothereed Reagan above all, he wrote, was the discovery that Communist Party members operated in secret and did not tell the truth. “I, like you, will defend the right of any American to openly practice and preach any political philosophy from monarchy to anarchy,” he told Hefner. “But this is not the case with regard to the communist. He is bound by party discipline to deny he is a communist so that he can by subversion and stealth impose on an unwilling people the rule of the International Communist Party which is in fact the government of Soviet Russia. Anti-communism for Reagan, then was not primarily foreign policy or geopolitics; it was personal and moralistic in nature, driven by his experiences with people he considered sophisticated and devious…

“General Secretary” is probably more apt than “czar” for Browner.

Carbon Control News reports that in a June 9 hearing before the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee,

[David Sokol, the chairman of Warren Buffet’s utility subsidiary MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, said] utilities, and by extension consumers, will be charged twice under the trading provisions of the legislation, “first to pay for emission allowances, which will not reduce greenhouse gas emissions by one ounce, and then for the construction of new low- and zero-carbon power plants and other actions that will actually do the job of reducing these emissions… This bill will cost hundreds of billions of dollars, and we think it is wrong to saddle customers with these unnecessary and duplicative costs that provide them with absolutely no benefits.”