Surprise: Denmark Admits Wind Power Is Too Expensive

By William Teach May 28, 2016 – 5:15 pm

One day wind power will be worthwhile monetarily, economically, and personally. I still say that there should be more of a focus on small projects aimed more to individual buildings and homes, empowering (sic) home and business owners to get off the grid. Interestingly, the Big Big Projects empower not just Government, but those big evil companies Progressives say they hate. Buy, anyhow, how is this shaking out?

Denmark has been heading the vanguard in the battle for wind power, but now admits it’s become too expensive

Denmark has led the charge for renewable energy, but now the green policies have become too expensive.

In 2015, Denmark set a new world record by generating the equivalent of 42.1% of the country’s total energy consumption by wind. Denmark is also the world’s largest exporter of wind power equipment. So it’s fair to say that Denmark is perhaps the world’s leading wind power nation.

Yay, Denmark!

The Danish consumers and companies pay the highest prices for electricity within the European Union, EU, according to an analysis from the European Electricity Association, Eurelectric.

The analysis showed that in 2014 a staggering 66 percent of the average Danish electricity bill went to taxes and fees, 18 percent to transportation and only 15 percent of the price was for the electricity in itself. Only Germany came close with 52 percent in electricity taxes.

Without all these extra costs Danes would pay below the European average for their energy.

“We can’t accept this, as the private sector and households are paying far too much. Denmark’s renewable policy has turned out to be too expensive,” the climate minister said.

Anyone who is shocked, raise your hand.

Read: Surprise: Denmark Admits Wind Power Is Too Expensive »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach May 28, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…are carbon pollution creating cans of beer, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Reaganite Republican, with a post on telling the difference between Hillary and Donald quotes.

Any suggestions on next week’s theme?

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Trump Is Worse Than Everyone Thought On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach May 28, 2016 – 7:40 am

So, Donald Trump gave a speech on energy Thursday, or so I hear. I was actually watching the speech live, but tuned out when he wasn’t seeming to get to the energy part, just typical rambling by Donald on this and that and the other. But, Mashable supposedly listened to it, or, most likely, read someone else’s story on the speech. Regardless, in an “analysis” by Andrew Freeman

Trump on climate: He’s even worse than we thought

No one expected Donald Trump to give a single energy speech and suddenly pivot to the left on global warming, after a record of expressing skepticism that global warming exists on several prior occasions.

However, few of even the most die-hard, wary environmentalists likely expected what they got on Thursday, when Trump both effectively clinched the nomination and gave a dismissive energy speech in North Dakota.

The speech amounted to a broadside against the Obama administration’s climate and energy policies, as well as Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton’s proposals, in addition to climate science and energy market realities.

Well, that is a good thing in my book. We need to use our own energy sources, including oil and natural gas. Any Warmist who doesn’t like it should give up their own use of oil immediately.

Fortunately for Paris agreement fans, Trump cannot unilaterally cancel it, but he can mortally wound it.

Freeman doesn’t say why, he simply just continues a meme being propagated by Warmists. In fact, Trump, if he wins the presidency, can simply issue an executive order cancelling America’s participation. For all intent purposes, that is how America joined the Paris climate accord. It was never ratified by the Senate, hence, it has no force of law.

Whether a President Trump would pull out of the accords is another question.

Trump went so far as to imply that climate change is a “phony” environmental concern when he said:

“A Trump administration will focus on real environmental challenges, not the phony ones we’ve been looking at.”

This is one of the few things I like about Trump. However, I do not trust him, as there have been vacillations on the subject. He is right, though, that we should deal with real environmental issues, not this phony manufactured on on ‘climate change’, which is really just a left wing attempt to increase taxes, along with more governmental control of people, energy, private institutions, and the economy, mostly at the federal level.

Instead of speaking truth to power and saying that the glory days of “drill, baby, drill” may be gone, as a market-based transition to renewable energy continues, he chose to throw red meat to the crowd.

As opposed to Democrats like Hillary and Bernie, who yammer on about ‘climate change’ before getting on fossil fueled planes and SUVs.

This speech effectively put Trump at the top of the enemies list for every climate advocate, business executive and world leader committed to taking the climate threat seriously. The reality is that Trump’s policies as he presented them today cannot be implemented if we are to have any hope of containing global warming to a somewhat manageable level.

The policies as written and pushed by most Warmists would have a negligible effect on the climate (in theory) to start with, so, ignoring them won’t change the end results, particularly since Mankind has only a tiny effect on global effects of a warming climate, which, surprise, has been happening off and on throughout the Holocene. But, hey, good news, Trump has made the top of the enemies list! Fascists/authoritarians love their enemies lists.

Read: Trump Is Worse Than Everyone Thought On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in Donald Trump, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Family Of Kate Steinle, Murdered By An Illegal Alien, Files Lawsuit

By William Teach May 28, 2016 – 7:13 am

You remember Kate Steinle. She was murdered by an illegal alien in San Francisco with the stolen gun of a federal agent. The illegal should have never been in the country. He was a 5 time deported absconder. And while Obama has plenty of time to place a phone call to people who come out as gay, he had no time to call Kate’s family

(Fox News) Relatives of the woman shot to death on a San Francisco pier last year filed a lawsuit Friday saying the illegal immigrant accused in the killing should have been in custody if not for a series of mistakes by city and federal workers.

The killing of Kate Steinle in July 2015 and the arrest of Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez put San Francisco’s leaders on the defensive as critics and outside politicians called for a change in the city’s sanctuary law. Despite national outrage, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors on Tuesday upheld those protections for people in the country illegally.

The sheriff at the time of the killing, Ross Mirkarimi, is named in the lawsuit, along with ICE and the Bureau of Land Management. Mirkarimi previously defended the release of the suspect, a repeat drug offender and habitual border-crosser.

The illegal in question was convicted 7 times of felonies.

Lopez-Sanchez was in the country illegally after being released from a San Francisco jail despite a request from federal immigration authorities that local officials keep him in custody for possible deportation. Lopez-Sanchez was previously deported five times to his native Mexico.

What does it say about American politics when a city is allowed to ignore federal law on immigration, while allowing a convicted felon who has been deported numerous times to walk free, and no one seems to do anything about the cities? Good for Kate’s family. Too bad Obama isn’t named in the lawsuit for failing to uphold the laws. Hopefully, this lawsuit will create a precedent that puts sanctuary cities and certain law enforcement on notice that they will be liable for the criminal conduct of the illegals they let roam free.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Family Of Kate Steinle, Murdered By An Illegal Alien, Files Lawsuit »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Dems Are Super Enthused To Engage In Witch Hunts Of Climate Skeptics

By William Teach May 27, 2016 – 2:16 pm

And they trot out a line that should be very familiar to those of you who read this little blog

(Daily Caller)  Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and other left-wing lawmakers wrote a letter Thursday to Attorney General Loretta Lynch thrashing GOP efforts to block an investigation into ExxonMobil over fraud charges.

Sanders’ letter, which was co-authored by Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren, from Massachusetts, and Rhode Island’s Sheldon Whitehouse, suggests that Republican efforts to stymie the investigation “reprises the tobacco lawsuit’s own early history of efforts from Congress to discourage or interfere with that lawsuit in order to protect the tobacco industry.”

Of course, there’s a big difference: there was actual evidence of fraud and shady business practices with Big Tobacco. That matters little to Warmists

Sanders and Warren call the Republican’s free speech argument nonsense.

The First Amendment argument, Warren and Sanders explain, was soundly rejected by the Department of Justice and by the United States D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal back in the 1980s when lobbyists used it to protect the tobacco industry from investigation.

“It has always been and remains good law that fraud is not protected by the First Amendment,” the letter reads. “It would be a sorry world in which corporations engaged in fraud could pull the screen of the First Amendment over any investigation of their fraud.”

Of course, we have this pesky Bill of Rights thingy, which not only includes the right to Free Speech, Free Association, etc, but

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If Warren, Sanders, et al have evidence, let’s see it. Otherwise, this is a fishing expedition, using the power of the state and federal governments to intimidate and silence citizens, in violation of law and their oaths of office. Let’s not forget that Sanders explicitly calls to “Bring climate deniers to justice so we can aggressively tackle climate change” as part of his official policy position, a blatant violation of the Constitution, not too mention an abuse of power.

Read: Dems Are Super Enthused To Engage In Witch Hunts Of Climate Skeptics »

Posted in Democrats, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 27, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a world parched from too much carbon pollution that also floods in certain places, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on Trump beginning to court Muslims.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Famous Heritage Sites Under Threat From ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach May 27, 2016 – 7:16 am

Every once in a while, the Cult of Climastrology will trot out some doomsaying regarding special places around the world. And like a bad penny (weird saying), it’s back

Statue of Liberty and Venice among sites at risk from climate change, says UN
‘Urgent and clear need’ to limit temperature rises to protect key sites from warming, rising seas and harsher weather

Climate change now poses the single biggest threat to the world’s most famous heritage sites – including the Galápagos islands, the Statue of Liberty, Easter Island and Venice – according to a UN sponsored report.

The researchers looked at 31 natural and cultural world heritage sites in 29 countries that are vulnerable to increasing temperatures, melting glaciers, rising seas, more intense weather, worsening droughts and longer wildfire seasons. They believe this number is the tip of the iceberg.

There is an urgent and clear need to limit temperature rises to protect key heritage, the study by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), the UN heritage body Unesco and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) concludes.

So, doom, unless everyone follows the prescriptions of the Paris Climate Accords and lives like its 1499

The Statue of Liberty in New York is one of the sites at risk from rising sea levels and storms, illustrated by the devastating Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Global warming is raising sea levels and increasing the risk of floods, droughts and potentially fiercer storms, all of which can cause severe damage. The Galápagos islands, where Charles Darwin gained insights into evolution, and monuments and natural wonders from the port of Cartagena in Colombia to the Shiretoko national park in Japan, were also named as being under threat.

Sea rise around the Statue Of Liberty is around average, measuring just 2.84mm a year, equivalent to .93 feet of sea rise over 100 years. It’ll take quite a bit of time for it to just get to the top of the sea wall itself. As for the Galapagos? They’ve see warmer periods than today, the same for other parks.

Scientists involved in the report said it was vital to limit global warming to no more than 2C, regarded by experts as the limit of safety beyond which climate change is likely to become catastrophic and irreversible. Governments agreed at a landmark climate conference last December that they would cut greenhouse gas emissions to the level needed to prevent temperatures rising that high.

“Now, more than ever, we need countries to back up with action the promises they made in Paris,” said Markham, in a conference call with journalists on Thursday.

And that’s what this is about: propping up the Paris deal. With lots and lots of money and Government. Warmists can do their part by giving up their own use of fossil fuels and going completely carbon neutral.

Read: Famous Heritage Sites Under Threat From ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times: Say, Hillary Is Pretty Much A Liar On Her Email Server, Eh?

By William Teach May 27, 2016 – 6:48 am

The NY Times Editorial Board has finally chimed in on the State Department’s report on Hillary’s illegal email server, and finds her to be as secretive and lying as always, which is interesting, considering the same NY Times EB has been rather supportive of Hillary and dismissive of her detractors, regarding her email issues

(NY Times) Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the presidency just got harder with the release of the State Department inspector general’s finding that “significant security risks” were posed by her decision to use a private email server for personal and official business while she was secretary of state. Contrary to Mrs. Clinton’s claims that the department had “allowed” the arrangement, the inspector general also found that she had not sought or received approval to use the server.

So far, no security breaches have been reported; a separate F.B.I. investigation is looking into that. But above and beyond security questions, the inspector general’s report is certain to fuel doubts about Mrs. Clinton’s trustworthiness, lately measured as a significant problem for her in public polls.

Significant? I’d say so, as noted at the Washington Free Beacon

Voters most associate the words “liar,” “not trustworthy,” and “scandals” with Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton, according to the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

Kornacki also described how only 19 percent of voters believe Clinton is honest and straightforward, according to the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

Trump hits 35%. Oh, and the FBI investigation? They aren’t just looking into whether there were any breaches: they’re investigating whether laws were broken by Clinton and her cohorts, including the Espionage Act. Back to the Times

This defensive posture seems at play in the email controversy, as well as her refusal, for that matter, to release the lucrative speeches she made to Wall Street audiences. The reflex she is revealing again now — to hunker down when challenged — is likely to make her seem less personable to many voters, and it will surely inflame critics’ charges of an underlying arrogance.

Donald Trump, her Republican rival, will be merciless in swinging the inspector general’s report like a cudgel. Accordingly, Mrs. Clinton now faces a measurably greater challenge in proving that she is the well-qualified politician her supporters know her to be, based on her varied career as a senator, secretary of state and first lady deeply involved in public life. This is a challenge to be faced not with a contrived campaign makeover, but with a far greater investment of candor before the public.

Two points. First, don’t expect candor. A Zebra cannot change its stripes, and the comments of Hillary and her surrogates since the report was released show they are attempting to spin it away. Second, we’re still waiting to hear exactly what her accomplishments were.

Even now, it seems a stretch to say that Mrs. Clinton’s email mishaps should disqualify her for the White House, particularly considering the alternative of Mr. Trump with his manifold evasions — not least his refusal to release tax returns that could shed light on his claims to great wealth, his charitable contributions and other deductions and possible conflicts of interest.

They aren’t mishaps: they break the law. If you were a private citizen using an outside server in an attempt to keep your corporate email conversations separate from the company, you could easily be in civil and criminal trouble. It’s those pesky records keeping laws, and the government has them for the government, as well. Oh, plus all those criminal laws about protecting national security material, for which others have been prosecuted, and convicted, over much less. Trump hasn’t broken the law.

But the nation should not be judging leadership as a measure of who is less untrustworthy. Mrs. Clinton has to answer questions about the report thoroughly and candidly. That is her best path back to the larger task of campaigning for the presidency.

Interesting: we’re suddenly supposed to ignore trustworthy as a measure of leadership.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times: Say, Hillary Is Pretty Much A Liar On Her Email Server, Eh? »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Ecosexual Students Marry The Ocean Or Something

By William Teach May 26, 2016 – 4:00 pm

At least transgenders are simply confused, and a bit of therapy would help out. These people are just bat guano insane, and nothing can be done except to isolate them from sane people

(Campus Reform) Earlier this month, a professor at Santa Monica College led students in an ‘EcoSexual Sextravaganza’ in which participants ‘married the ocean.’

Amber Katherine, a philosophy professor who helped organize the May 14 event, explained to Campus Reform that the purpose of the “wedding” was to bring about a deeper love for the planet through “ecocentric passion and even lust.”

The ceremony began with Bruce Cartier, a former SMC student, proclaiming to those gathered at Santa Monica Beach that “today we stand upon this holy earth and in this sacred space to witness the rite of matrimony between the sea and us all.”

California taxpayers subsidize the tuition of each in-state student by around $7000 per semester. BTW, there is video at the link

One attendee of the event—who identified herself only as “Serenity”—spoke about the importance of gaining consent from the earth before proceeding with a physical relationship.

“Back when I would hug trees in Santa Cruz, I would sort of ask the tree if it was okay if I hugged it and I would feel their spirit or energy or something give a response back, and then proceed accordingly,” she told The Corsair. “Consent is definitely important. Do you think the Earth would consent to fracking and pollution? Probably not”.

 

Read: Ecosexual Students Marry The Ocean Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 26, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle causing carbon pollution which causes extreme rain and a muddy world, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Western Hero, with a post on being careful what you ask for.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove