New York Governor Finally Signs Laws Making Businesses Pay For Climate (scam) Emissions

By William Teach December 28, 2024 – 7:00 am

What could possibly go wrong with this?

New York to charge fossil fuel companies for damage from climate change

Large fossil fuel companies would have to pay fees to help New York fight the effects of climate change under a bill signed Thursday by Gov. Kathy Hochul.

The new law requires companies responsible for substantial greenhouse gas emissions to pay into a state fund for infrastructure projects meant to repair or avoid future damage from climate change.

Lawmakers approved the bill earlier this year to force big oil and gas companies to contribute to the cost of repairs after extreme weather events and resiliency projects such as coastal wetland restoration and upgrades to roads, bridges and water drainage systems.

“The Climate Change Superfund Act is now law, and New York has fired a shot that will be heard round the world: the companies most responsible for the climate crisis will be held accountable,” said state Sen. Liz Krueger, a Democrat who sponsored the bill.

I wonder if Hochul and Krueger have given up their own use of fossil fuels? Nah. We know they haven’t.

The law won’t start penalizing companies immediately. Instead, the state must come up with rules on how to identify responsible parties, notify companies of the fines and create a system to determine which infrastructure projects will be paid for by the fund. Legal challenges are expected.

They’ll have to figure out how much the cost of living will go up from this law, and how many companies will leave NY. Let’s go back to when they were discussing this earlier in 2024

New York Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie threw cold water on a bill that would require major energy companies to pay for climate change remediation, saying the measure could ultimately result in higher costs for utility ratepayers.

The Climate Change Superfund Act would require companies that contributed significantly to the buildup of greenhouse gases to pay for part of the mitigation efforts to offset climate change, including major infrastructure projects like water barriers.

The measure was approved in the state Senate, but has stalled in the Assembly.

Heastie says he’s concerned that it would result in higher utility prices, as the energy companies pass down the costs of the new requirements to ratepayers.

“I’ve never in my life seen corporations choose the ratepayer over the stockholder,” Heastie said. “Asking these companies to pay more, it’s going to be, of course, taken out on the ratepayer.”

It’s unknown if they managed to figure out a way to make it so the fees/taxes can’t be passed on, but, that would mean more companies leaving. They will be passed on. Hopefully those companies that stick around really sock it to the government for government purchases.

Read: New York Governor Finally Signs Laws Making Businesses Pay For Climate (scam) Emissions »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrats Upset That Deporting Illegals Could Mess With Agriculture

By William Teach December 28, 2024 – 6:45 am

There was a time when there was a pretty big business in migrants with visas coming up from Mexico and Central America to work agriculture, then going home when the job was done. Or even being in the US for a few years on a legal visa. Now, Democrats just want all the illegals and fake asylum seekers to clean their homes, do their yards, and pick their veggies and fruits

Trump migrant deportations could threaten states’ agricultural economies

If President-elect Donald Trump follows through on his pledge to deport millions of immigrants, it could upend the economies of states where farming and other food-related industries are crucial — and where labor shortages abound.

Immigrants make up about two-thirds of the nation’s crop farmworkers, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, and roughly 2 in 5 of them are not legally authorized to work in the United States.

Agricultural industries such as meatpacking, dairy farms and poultry and livestock farms also rely heavily on immigrants.

“We have five to six employees that do the work that nobody else will do. We wouldn’t survive without them,” said Bruce Lampman, who owns Lampman Dairy Farm, in Bruneau, Idaho. His farm, which has been in the family three decades, has 350 cows producing some 26,000 pounds of milk a day.

“My business and every agriculture business in the U.S. will be crippled if they want to get rid of everybody who does the work,” said Lampman, adding that his workers are worried about what’s to come.

OK, so, is Lampman employing people not authorized to work in the U.S., be it due to being unlawfully present or fake asylum seekers? That would be illegal. If they are authorized to work, not problem. Unless they are a criminal. Does Lampman, and other companies, want murderers, rapists, child abusers, thieves, etc., working for them? Because those are whom the Trump admin will go after first.

Anita Alves Pena, a Colorado State University professor of economics who studies immigration, noted that many agricultural employers already can’t find enough laborers. Without farm subsidies or other protections to make up for the loss of immigrant workers, she said, the harm to state economies could be significant.

Well, how about getting legal migrant workers? What they really want is to pay these people minimum wage or less to do the job. Are they saying their business model relies on illegal aliens?

How about having those sentenced to jail work the fields? Do the agriculture business owners want these people?

You want them, business owners?

Meanwhile

Migrants can accrue profound emotional trauma when journeying to the US. Mental health workers are stretched thin.

There’s a phrase in Haitian Creole that describes feelings of extreme stress, anxiety, or depression that are all too common among the thousands of new migrants arriving in Massachusetts: tet chaje.

The literal translation is “burdened head,” a feeling of being overwhelmed. People who work with the state’s surging number of new arrivals, a majority of whom are from Haiti, hear the term often.

Migrants may accrue profound emotional injury both in their home nations, where gang violence or state-sponsored oppression are common, and through the journey to the United States. Many experience rape and assault or witness the deaths of fellow travelers.

Can anyone think of a solution so they do not that profound emotional trauma?

Read: Democrats Upset That Deporting Illegals Could Mess With Agriculture »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Who’s Up For Some 2025 Climate (scam) Resolutions?

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 3:00 pm

It begins

Here are 12 climate resolutions to take with you into the new year

As we head into a new year, it’s a good idea to think about climate resolutions: what small actions can you take to reduce your carbon footprint?

From ditching disposable coffee cups to starting a community garden, our individual efforts go a long way.

Here is Change by Degrees’ handy monthly guide for making meaningful environmental change in 2025.

January: rethink your food

Start the year by focusing on what you eat. Agriculture accounts for a significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions so even small shifts – like cutting back on meat some days – can help. Eating local food that’s in season supports small farmers and reduces the carbon footprint of imported produce. It’s a win-win that will have an immediate and positive impact on your health and the pockets of small, organic farmers.

Would these be the same local farmers that Big Government is trying to destroy?

February: care for soil and trees

That’s environment, keeping a clean environment.

March: throw a ‘what should I do?’ party

Many people don’t realise their potential to contribute. Host a “what should I do?” party to connect friends with action. Untapped talents can inspire collective change, whether lobbying, organising cleanups, or creating art. Already know your role? Use this month to plan your year of action.

How about giving up your own use of fossil fuels and making your own life carbon neutral?

I’ll let you read the rest. These are all minimal things for the cultists. Will any of them do these? It’s all very silly and cult-like.

Read: Who’s Up For Some 2025 Climate (scam) Resolutions? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is snow that will SOON! melt away and never fall, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Doug Ross @ Journal, with a post on Larwyn’s Linx.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Dem Senator Brian Schatz Thinks They Need To Talk Like Normal People

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 10:30 am

Well, good luck with that. Along with talking to normal people

Brian Schatz to Democrats: Talk Like Normal People

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) can seem mellow. Having grown up in Hawaii, he exudes not only the Aloha spirit but what could be called shaka vibes. You know, that hang loose and catch-a-wave-when-it-comes sense of equilibrium that imbues many who hail from America’s Pacific paradise. (big snip)

I spent 45 minutes with Schatz earlier this month in his holiday and Hawaii-bedecked Hart office. He was blunt about a range of topics, most significantly his party’s failures and the necessity that they drop their faculty club and interest group vernacular. He was particularly scathing on the tic of using “center” as a verb. (snip)

You’re not quitting Twitter are you?

I still have an account. I am posting mostly on Bluesky.

But on the information environment piece, I think there’s the question of left-wing infrastructure, which I think should not be confused with the liberal project of preserving journalism and democracy, which is super important. But the problem is, a lot of liberal donors believe if we just fund good journalism, that that’s a counterweight to the right-wing noise machine. And I think that we’ve now learned that we have to build our own infrastructure, and that’s going to take money and staffing and all of that. I will help with that, but obviously as a federal legislator, that’s not my primary function.

He fails to realize that the vast majority of the news media is full of Democrats, and they push the Democrat narrative. And, if he’s sitting mostly on Bluesky, he’s speaking mostly to the choir, with the nuttiest of the nutters having moved over there. You can’t speak normal or to normal people if that’s your primary platform.

The third part of that, is that it’s not just that we’re unable to reach people. It’s that people are unable to reach us. So, when inflation was pissing people off, you could scarcely find a person in mainstream, left-wing circles, who would even talk about it. Except to explain that the Biden economy was better than other countries. And that the Biden stewardship was better than other industrialized nations. And by the way, I continue to think that’s true and totally irrelevant — If you’re talking about the question of are people pissed about the price of eggs, the answer is flatly yes they are. Not, ‘Don’t you know people are paying more in Paris and shouldn’t you be happy about that.’

He does have a point there, but, they won’t. Democrats think they are better than everyone else, so, they cannot be honest with anyone. They expect everyone to just go along with what the Elites say. Keep your mouth shut, suck it up, vote Democrat.

But who appeals to you in ’28?

I think whomever we nominate has to talk like a normal person. That is to me the most important thing. Normal doesn’t mean that they have an affect that is identifiable midwestern or southern or some sort of regional — But this person is real. If you had them over for dinner, you could understand what the hell they were talking about. And so I think we are looking for someone who can plausibly fit in as a human being all across the country. I don’t know who that’s going to be. But the challenge is going to be, how do you maintain your progressive values and not sound like you just got your post-doctoral thesis in sociology. And God bless those people.

Good luck with that. A goodly chunk of your elected officials, their advisors, and all your Credentialed News folks speak in Progressive. Who can they nominate who does not speak like an Elitist wackjob lefty? Who talks down to people who aren’t getting with the program?

Read: Dem Senator Brian Schatz Thinks They Need To Talk Like Normal People »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

French Government To Require Solar Panels Above All Parking Lots

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 8:29 am

It’s not a bad idea, but, done for the wrong cultish idea, and, really, who pays?

Government announces new law that could drastically change parking lots nationwide — here’s what you need to know

France is taking a major step toward renewable energy by requiring large parking lots to install solar canopies.

As The Progress Playbook reported, France first announced this policy in 2023 and finalized it recently. It will apply to outdoor parking areas larger than 1,500 square meters, with the aim of expanding the country’s clean energy output.

Under the new law, most large parking lots will soon be covered by solar panels, transforming them into mini power plants. This mandate aligns with France’s goal to accelerate renewable energy adoption and reduce reliance on dirty energy sources, such as coal and gas.

In addition to generating clean energy, solar canopies offer another perk: shade for parked cars, protecting them from overheating in the sun.

Realistically, putting solar panels above parking areas is a good idea: they are large pieces of land which are used for one thing, and solar will not interfere with their operations, and, as mentioned, provide shade. Not just for the cars but for the people walking to them, as well as protect them from rain and snow.

Solar carports have several advantages. Johan Pienaar, CEO of Eversolar, explained to The Progress Playbook that they make excellent use of space, are easy to maintain, and generate high yields because panels can be optimally positioned. Though they come with higher upfront costs compared to rooftop solar systems, their efficiency ensures a similar cost per kilowatt-hour over time.

“From a return on investments perspective, solar carports definitely make sense,” Pienaar said.

Since I do not want to do math, 1,000 square meters is a block 20 meters by 50 meters. Which is 65 feet by 164 feet. Applied to 1,500 square meters, that’s not a particularly a big space. Maybe 50 car spaces. How much is the cost, and how long does it make to recoup the losses? Who will get the power? Will it be fed back into the grid, or, do the companies get it? And, what will companies charge to make up for the installation costs if they are forced to pay for installation?

Overall, it is a mostly benign climate cult law. Of course, France is also trying to force their peasants out of their vehicles, so, will this be for the Elites who continue to travel in fossil fueled SUVs and limos?

Read: French Government To Require Solar Panels Above All Parking Lots »

Posted in Energy, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Hot Take: The Supreme Court Ruling Against The Gender Confused Is Bad For Women’s Equality

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 8:13 am

The lengths that the people supporting mental health issues will go to

The Supreme Court Case Over Trans Youth Could Also Decimate Women’s Equality

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in what is likely to be the term’s blockbuster case, United States v. Skrmetti. The case considers the constitutionality of state laws that ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. While the case itself addresses only a law from Tennessee, 26 states have passed similar laws that will be affected by the outcome.

A blanket ban on such care risks devastating effects for those youth who need it. But as the argument made clear, that is not all that is at stake. The case is also about women’s rights, and a fundamental legal principle that helped to secure them: Courts should be skeptical of laws that discriminate on the basis of sex.

With the defenders of Tennessee’s law challenging that bedrock principle, it is not only transgender equality, but sex equality more broadly that is in doubt. Depending on the outcome, Skrmetti could be the next Dobbs, adding another nail in the coffin to women’s legal freedoms — and freedoms we all enjoy regardless of sex.

The United States is challenging the Tennessee law on the basis of the Constitution’s equal protection clause, which has been interpreted to guarantee sex equality. Under this provision, sex-based laws — that is, laws that on their face classify people on the basis of sex — are subject to what is known as heightened scrutiny, which means that courts will invalidate them unless there is a persuasive reason to draw a sex-based line.

This really is the way Democrats think, that males with mental illness are actually women. And that denying all sorts of life-altering drugs and surgeries to minors will cause real women to lose all their rights. That states will be able to legally discriminate against biological women. The same women who are having nutjob penis invade their sports, locker rooms, changing rooms, and bathrooms.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar made clear at the argument that this constitutes sex discrimination. She offered an illustrative example: “[T]ake Ryan Roe, who is one of the individual plaintiffs here. He wants to take testosterone in order to live and identify as a boy, and he’s prohibited by SB1 from doing so because his birth sex was female. But, if you change Ryan’s birth sex and suppose he was assigned male at birth, then SB1’s restriction lifts.” Drawing a line between biological females and biological males — one can get the treatment and the other can’t — should trigger demanding judicial scrutiny of the law.

And this is one of the reasons that Democrats lost the election: they think transgender males are women. Here you have a female solicitor gender who’s deluded enough to argue against protecting actual women, along with allowing minors to have life-altering elective medical treatment.

Realistically, if the Court rules in favor of Tennessee nothing will happen to real women. The laws are quite clear on women’s equality, and states are not going to try and put the women back into the kitchen. This is just Democrat lunacy, as usual.

Read: Hot Take: The Supreme Court Ruling Against The Gender Confused Is Bad For Women’s Equality »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 30 Comments | Trackback URL

On The Return To The Office For Federal Employees Debate, It’s Not About You The Taxpayer

By William Teach December 26, 2024 – 3:00 pm

Obviously, the rank and file of the Washington Post are all for working from home (and the beach, the mountains, in between Call Of Duty sessions and binge watching their shows), especially since those who run the WP have told employees they need to work from work. There is something interesting in this article

Trump wants federal workers back in the office. It may be a tall task.

President-elect Donald Trump warned federal employees last week that they must return to the office – or else “they’re going to be dismissed.”

The threat was the latest and loudest signal yet that Trump, his allies and Republicans in Congress are committed to ending a remote-work culture that became widespread for the civil service of 2.3 million during the coronavirus pandemic but that many conservatives now decry as an outdated taxpayer-funded perk that has hurt performance across the government.

A quick return to pre-pandemic – or even stricter – federal office policies is not likely to happen with the stroke of a presidential pen.

It’s 2024, almost 2025: the time of Wuhan Flu is long behind us. What is the point in all these taxpayer funded federal employees (supposedly) working from home? How about a study from productivity specialists to see if these taxpayer funded federal employees are actually doing their jobs. How many are getting perks associated with coming in to their place of work, which they aren’t doing?

“It’s in a lot of labor contracts,” Cathie McQuiston, deputy general counsel at the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), the largest union representing federal workers, said of the telework arrangements. “And at a lot of these agencies, the reality is, they don’t have the place to put people to force them back five days a week.”

Um, what? Where were they working beforehand? What happened to the office space? Oh, right, Biden was dumping the space over the years. Anyhow, here’s the part that really got my ire up

“AFGE embraces a work environment that includes full in-person, alternate work schedules, telework, and full remote work to best serve the needs of our members and staff,” Brittany Holder, another union spokeswoman, said in an email. The AFGE represents about 750,000 federal employees.

It’s not about what serves the federal employees, it’s what best serves the American taxpayers, who have their money involuntarily taken to pay the federal employees to work from home (at the racetrack, at the bar, sitting out at the pool). That should be the primary consideration. That’s what the job entails. They’ve long forgotten that they are public servants. If it makes sense and saves money without losing productivity to work from home, great! If not, come to the office, or go try and work in the private sector.

Read: On The Return To The Office For Federal Employees Debate, It’s Not About You The Taxpayer »

Posted in Government | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 26, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is a calm sea from carbon pollution killing the wind, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Chicks On the Right, with a post on Jill Biden telling Joe to turn on Democrats, burn it all down.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Santa Cruz Pier Collapse Linked To Enviroweenies Suing To Stop Repairs

By William Teach December 26, 2024 – 10:30 am

Not as many people were Blaming global boiling for the collapse of the pier, but, they were out there

https://twitter.com/RepJimmyPanetta/status/1871338402588840093

Panetta was just one of many. The reality

Santa Cruz Wharf Collapses After Environmental Lawsuit Delayed Repairs

Repairs to the historic wharf in Santa Cruz, which collapsed in heavy swell on Monday, were reportedly delayed after an environmental and preservationist group’s lawsuit delayed changes to the 110-year-old structure by several years.

Waves were unusually high on Monday up and down the West Coast, bringing Christmas joy to surfers, who flocked to popular surf spots, north and south, to catch the swell.

I’ll disagree with Breitbart on the waves: there was nothing unusual about the wave heights. This happens all the time, which is one of the reasons why California has long been mentioned as the surfing mecca of the continental US, and one of the best spots in the world. Heck, looking at the two videos in the article I see some basic waves. Good ones, maybe 3 footers (wave height is half the face height). The ones up in Santa Cruz were bigger, but, nothing out of the norm. Just strong winter waves

The San Francisco Chronicle recalled Tuesday that the city had planned to reinforce the wharf, but that the proposal had faced a lawsuit by a group of environmentalists and preservationists called “Don’t Morph the Wharf,” which caused repairs to be delayed and also caused part of the project to be abandoned.

The Chronicle reported:

In 2016, the city had proposed another plan: create a below-deck walkway wrapping around the wharf’s western side, creating new space for pedestrians while providing the piles a buffer against incoming waves. The plan would have extended the wharf in some new places and added new buildings — including one directly atop the section that collapsed.

Opponents of the additions, assembled under the name Don’t Morph the Wharf, sued in late 2020, arguing the city hadn’t done a proper environmental review of the plan.

The city countered that the new “Westside Walkway” was necessary to mitigate damage from waves during storms, as it would extend past the current wharf and act as a break for waves, preventing them from hitting the wharf and the buildings on it, protecting the pilings on the west side of the wharf and providing additional lateral stability.

The enviroweenies won their suit in 2022, meaning that any plans to protect the old pier were put off for years. Plus, it was just old, and had taken a beating over all those years. It is in the ocean, after all. Waves happen. Big waves happen. Because ocean. Heck, you get huge, strong waves in the Great Lakes. That’s the way it works.

Going back to Panetta’s tweet, this is a problem with Democrats thinking every problem requires federal money, rather than state and local money.

Read: Santa Cruz Pier Collapse Linked To Enviroweenies Suing To Stop Repairs »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove