Bummer: EU Failing To Reach CO2 Targets

Is anyone particularly shocked?

(AZ.cleantech.com) In 2005, the Kyoto Protocol went into effect. The EU had 15 member nations in 2004, and it formed a system for trading carbon allowances. A carbon tax had been imposed by the Scandinavian nations since the 1990s. These two measures were part of the EU’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions. When compared to its level of greenhouse gas emissions in 1990, the EU had committed to reduce its emissions by 8%.

Martin Freedman, from the Towson University in USA, and his colleagues have conducted a study on the disclosures made by certain EU firms about their carbon emissions. They studied the period from 2005 to 2007. They found that the measures to achieve the Kyoto goals did not seem to have had a significant impact. Further, they were not able to conclude whether the initiatives had significant changes in the EU industry.

Based on the data examined for the period, the EU may not meet its committed target within the time period. Further analysis and data may be affected by weather patterns, and the global recession. The EU may not be able to fulfill its obligations towards reducing carbon emissions as part of the Kyoto Protocol’s first phase.

What the measures did do was move more money directly from the private sector to the public sector without first flowing through the economy, which also meant consumer prices rose, unemployment stayed high, and the economies stagnated. We’ve known for quite some time that the measures put in place for those who signed on to the Kyoto Protocol were not being met, and, even if they had been met, wouldn’t change anything in the climate. But, they did give the governments more money and power!

Read: Bummer: EU Failing To Reach CO2 Targets »

If All You See…

…is the flag of the worlds’ worst carbon polluter, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is the Troglopundit, who doesn’t have an American Flag favicon, but is a big Danica fan.

Read: If All You See… »

Obama’s Top 10 Broken Promises

What, only 10? As The Lonely Conservative writes “President Obama has so many broken promises, I wonder how they managed to whittle it down to just ten.” Graphic originally from here. It’s a long one, so it’s buried beneath the fold

Obama top 10 broken promises

Doug Ross: “this chart pretty much sums up the SCOAMF effect.”

PS: I thought it was all just one big graphic, guess it so 2. Working off Droid at the moment, head to one of the links for the other 5.

Read: Obama’s Top 10 Broken Promises »

People Pretty Upset Over Unintentional Earth Hours

Last November, a United Nations report told us just how evil air conditioning and refrigerators are. And a couple weeks ago the NY Times had a hissy fit over A/C, but, of course, wants those in developing nations to bear the burden of having their A/C restricted. Warmist policies would lead to rolling brownouts and blackouts. What happens when their beliefs are forcibly implemented by Mother Nature? Extended Earth Hour, and people do not like it

(CBS News) From North Carolina to New Jersey, nearly 1.8 million people still without electricity were asking the same question Monday evening: Why will it take so long to get the lights back on?

Nearly three full days after a severe summer storm lashed the East Coast, utilities warned that many neighborhoods could remain in the dark for much of the week, if not beyond.

Friday’s storm arrived with little warning and knocked out power to 3 million homes and businesses, so utility companies have had to wait days for extra crews traveling from as far away as Quebec and Oklahoma. And the toppled trees and power lines often entangled broken equipment in debris that must be removed before workers can even get started.

Many people have been screaming at the power companies to Do Something. Not that easy when they have to deal with all the downed trees and debris and put up new lines, power poles, and other necessary parts of the grid. And there is serious concern over the health of seniors during this long Earth Hour.

The lack of power completely upended many daily routines. Supermarkets struggled to keep groceries from going bad. People on perishable medication called pharmacies to see how long their medicine would keep. In Washington, officials set up collection sites for people to drop off rotting food. Others held weekend cookouts in an attempt to use their food while it lasted. And in West Virginia, National Guard troops handed out food and water and made door-to-door checks.

There’s a brief view of what life would be like under Warmist policies, as coal fired plants are taken off line and replaced with unfeasible and inconsistent solar and wind, which are unable to cope with the power demands during what was historically called “weather events.”

(The Town Talk) With no power at his home, Morgan Smith has been sleeping on the floor where he works at Market Street Coffee. On Monday morning, the barista was joined by people who crowded into the cafe – one of the few places in this rural corner of Loudoun County with power and free, working Wi-Fi – to charge cellphones and work on their laptops.

People are also sleeping in basements and streaming towards those few places with power, sometimes just to take a shower.

(Baltimore Sun) For the second time in less than a year, hundreds of thousands of Baltimore Gas & Electric and Pepco customers are being forced to endure a week or more without electricity because of damage caused by a severe storm. Utility officials are aggressively defending their response. They say the storm was unusually intense and that the companies’ crews and those called in from others states are working hard to restore power. We’re sure they are. But that is of little comfort to those who are coping with the logistical, financial and, potentially, safety consequences of doing without electricity during a prolonged heat wave. State regulators need to take a hard look at what the state’s major utilities are doing to prepare their systems to weather severe storms, and they and company officials need to rethink a communications strategy that leaves customers in the dark in more ways than one.

Welcome to a world under “climate change (hoax)” policies. Of course, these same people are calling for all sorts of new government regulations and mandates. In the wake of the storm, the typical characters are calling for tons more spending on infrastructure (never let a good crisis go to waste). One idea is to bury all the power lines, which, on the surface is a good idea. That’s what we have in my neighborhood, and we rarely lose power. Of course, when the substations are taken out, doesn’t matter. And, it’s easier said then done in old neighborhoods.

Anyhow, Happy Earth Week! Enjoy a view of the future of liberal policies. I’m sure Warmists are calm and collected and not complaining at all, right? Right?

Read: People Pretty Upset Over Unintentional Earth Hours »

Charlotte To Limit DNC Protest Groups

That’s right, the Charlotte, NC city council, comprise of 10 Democrats, including the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem, and only 2 Republicans has decided to limit the 1st Amendment Rights of protesters

(WRAL) The city of Charlotte is holding a lottery to decide which groups can protest against September’s Democratic National Convention and when.

The Charlotte Observer reports that Monday’s lottery will randomly assign times during the DNC to participate in the designated parade route and speakers platform. The lottery is being held in the meeting chamber of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center, and it’s open to the public.

On one hand, can you blame them? Most of the protests will involve unhinged and violent liberals, progressives, and anarchists (who vote Democrat), who, when they aren’t violent and threatening, make huge messes, poop on cop cars and doorsteps, and hassle people. They’ve also banned gas masks. No surprise, since Lefties are usually the ones who cause police to use tear gas. From the Charlotte Observer link

Anyone wanting to protest along a city-designated parade route – or use a “speaker’s platform” during the DNC – had to submit an application by last week.

Monday’s lottery will decide when and where those groups that applied will be allowed to protest.

The city has said that even though there will be two designated areas for protestors, people still have the right to protest or picket on any city sidewalk not closed for security reasons.

OK, I can kinda understand limiting the number of marches along city streets, so as to not hose the Charlotte residents. But, they have no problem with someone protesting way, way far away from the DNC area. For a Party that always talks about free speech, they sure seem to want to shut it down. But, then, they know what their supporters are capable of, and these rules are surely aimed against them.

Welcome to Moscow, North Carolina.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Charlotte To Limit DNC Protest Groups »

Irony: Talking About Climate Change And Get An “Audible Thud”

I’m a terrible person for finding this bad break a bit schadenfreude (via Tom Nelson)

GetUp director Simon Sheikh was recovering from a bout of influenza when he collapsed on live television.

Mr Sheikh slumped forward as panellists on the ABC’s Q&A program discussed the carbon tax and climate change, with his head making an audible thud as it hit the desk.

Irony is so ironic, considering that the Labor Party in Au. is getting destroyed over their carbon tax policies.

GetUp is a far left progressive (ie, fascistic) movement in Australia. Mr. Sheikh is doing OK and recovering. From the flu, that is.

Read: Irony: Talking About Climate Change And Get An “Audible Thud” »

If All You See…

…is an ocean that will rise up and swamp us all sometime in the future, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Thus Spake Russ, featuring a flag in the favicon.

Read: If All You See… »

Sidecar Highlights Just What Is Wrong With Big Government

Here’s an interesting one, via Grist

In theory, Sidecar is about sharing. Here’s how it’s supposed to work: You’re headed downtown in your car, but before you leave you check your Sidecar app. A user a few blocks down is looking for a ride in the same direction. You swing by, pick her up, and drop her off. Everyone wins by sharing — she gets to her destination, and you get to feel good that the gas you just burned went towards transporting more than one human being. (Plus, Sidecar suggests that she “donate” a little cash to you for your trouble.)

Obviously, Grist loves this because it is supposed to help mitigate globull warming thanks to reduced fossil fuel usage, since the person is going that way. Personally, I think it is a good idea, too, minus the globull warming nonsense. Nothing wrong with car pooling, reducing energy usage. But, get this

Sidecar has to be careful not to say “this is just a different type of taxi service,” though. The company had to get a whole new law passed to make this service work, and it emphasizes that payment is voluntary.

And there in a nutshell is the problem with Big Government, which is always involved in everything. Here’s a damned good entrepreneurial idea, yet, they actually had to get a law passed to put the idea into practice. Why is it the government’s business if a company comes up with an idea to carpool and have the people being given a ride offer some cash to the owner of the vehicle? Somehow, Sidecar must be making some money off this idea, which is pretty good. Except for the part about possibly picking up “creepy people”.

No wonder the economy is stagnating: government is too heavily involved with our lives.

Read: Sidecar Highlights Just What Is Wrong With Big Government »

Mitt Romney’s Foreign Policy Won’t Include “Frenemies”

We’re starting to get a glimpse of how a President Romney would act on the international stage, which would be vastly different from (NMP) Obama’s

(Washington Times) Call it the “friend-enemy” distinction.

Mitt Romney has assembled a foreign-policy platform rooted in the belief that adversaries such as Russia must be confronted for backsliding on democracy and that Israel must be supported in the face of common threats such as a nuclear-armed Iran.

Advisers to the former Massachusetts governor contrast that approach and a belief in “American exceptionalism” with those of President Obama, whose foreign policy they characterize as putting its energy into trying to bargain with enemies while taking friends for granted.

“Gov. Romney believes that in foreign policy, you start with your friends,” said Eliot Cohen, who wrote the foreword to the Romney campaign’s 43-page foreign policy white paper last fall.

Foreign policy is obviously not a simple thing: the US sometimes has to deal with countries and leaders that aren’t the best on somewhat friendly terms, like with Pakistan and Mubarek’s Egypt. The Obama position, however, has been to reach out to enemies on comfy terms and blow off our allies. He’s blown of Israel and Britain many times. He dictates to allies such as France and Germany. And he shows a profound lack of diplomacy to “bad” countries such as Pakistan and Afghanistan. He blew off the Green Revolution in Iran and was mostly absent from the Arab Spring, which opened the door for the hardcore Islamists to start seeking power. His DOJ didn’t bother to tell the government of Mexico about the gunrunning operation Fast and Furious, which put assault weapons in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, leading to the deaths of at least 300 Mexican nationals. The list goes on.

The former Massachusetts governor “believes strongly in American exceptionalism, that America is a great country and the world is a better place if America leads,” Mr. Williamson said. “This is a huge contrast with Barack Obama. I don’t think anyone would argue that Mr. Obama believes in American exceptionalism. He believes that you should ‘lead from behind,’ whatever the heck that means.”

It’ll be interesting to see how much foreign policy plays in the upcoming election. Will there even be a debate based solely on foreign policy, as usually happens?

Read: Mitt Romney’s Foreign Policy Won’t Include “Frenemies” »

Mitch McConnell Says That Covering 30 Million People Isn’t The Point

I’ll admit, McConnell didn’t do a really good job of explaining the Republican position on Repeal and Replace, but, he did have a good point, which Obama cheerleader Greg Sargent misses

Mitch McConnell’s appearance today on Fox News Sunday was remarkably revealing — it showed as clearly as you could want that the Supreme Court decision is finally forcing Republicans to declare what, exactly, they would replace Obamacare with if they realize their goal of repealing it entirely.

Pressed by Chris Wallace to say what he would do to insure the 30 million people who will get insurance under Obamacare, McConnell at first dodged the question, instead launching into a litany of complaints about the law. He repeated the debunked claim that it would cut $500 billion from Medicare. Asked the question again by Wallace, McConnell actually laughed, and said he’d “get to it in a minute,” before claiming the best thing we can do for the health system overall is to get rid of the law and all of its “cuts” to health providers. He labeled Obamacare a “monstrosity” and vowed that there would not be a “2,700 page” Republican reform bill.

Um, the Washington Post’s own fact checker said the talking point about the $500 billion cut “falls in the category of technically correct but misleading.”

Asked a third time how Republicans would insure those 30 million people, McConnell said: “That is not the issue. The question is how you can go step by step to improve the American health care system.”

That is the point in addressing health care/insurance. The original positioning by Democrats was to make sure that the 30-45 million uninsured Americans would be able to purchase affordable insurance. Of course, that number drops a bit when we take out those who are illegal aliens and migrant/temporary workers (I hold the position that companies should have to provide health insurance to the migrants they hire, so the burden is not placed on hospitals). Then you consider those who were temporarily without insurance, such as those who have started new jobs. And those who do not want to purchase insurance, usually because they are young folks or have enough money to purchase care on their own. So the actual number is much lower. As the American Spectator pointed out

When all of these factors are put together, the 2003 BlueCross BlueShield study determined that 8.2 million Americans are actually without coverage for the long haul, because they are too poor to purchase health care but earn too much to qualify for government assistance. Even being without insurance still doesn’t mean they won’t have access to care, because federal law forbids hospitals from denying treatment to patients who show up at the emergency rooms.

We do have to consider that many are people without insurance due to pre-existing conditions. That is part of Obamacare that has to be kept, with a few tweaks, such as saying those without insurance have to purchase it well before they are about to get medical care, not right as they are about to get care, which is what Ocare causes them to do. And the best way to do that is to allow nationwide pooling for individuals and small companies, which would increase the number of healthy people driving down their costs, as well as the costs of the people with conditions.

I’m also for a law that doesn’t allow insurance companies to drop people because they became sick. That’s fine for auto insurance, but, we’re talking about people’s lives here.

Consider, though, what was the Democrat solution to the “30 million uninsured” issue per Obamacare? Finding ways to decrease costs so that they purchased insurance? Saying “hey, chump, if you don’t want insurance, well, you’re on your own. It’s your risk”? Moving them to the medicaid/medicare rolls? Nope. Obamacare mandates that they purchase insurance or pay a tax. The “eat your peas or go to your room” position.

How about allowing more customization of insurance plans, such as allowing people to purchase plans that are only for “catastrophic conditions”? That’s what your auto insurance does. It doesn’t cover basic maintenance. Typically, your deductibles are higher than the cost of three of the most problems with cars: front window, small dents, and scratches. Replacing your front window can set you back about $200 installed. A little dent or scratch about the same. Most have a $250 or higher deductible. The Democrat idea was to create even more mandates in coverage, which increases the cost of health insurance.

Obamacare ended as a way of involving Government in the health insurance/care decisions for all 300 million plus Americans. Let’s face it, the mandate would affect few of us: it’s all the other stuff that will damage our quality of care and cost of insurance.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Mitch McConnell Says That Covering 30 Million People Isn’t The Point »

Pirate's Cove