Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Obama: drill, baby, drill, and fight climate change

Barack Obama wants to win another term so he is trying to emulate Sarah Palin: drill, baby, drill. Today, the U.S. president announced plans for a broad expansion of offshore oil and gas drilling.



Climate Mash, Halloween, 2006. Many things have changed about this "long-term" AGW "problem", others have not. Note that Bush is drilling at the end of the video: will the green creators dare to humiliate Obama in the same way?

What is his reason? Reuters has an answer:
Obama announces drilling expansion for climate push
He is drilling to fight climate change! ;-) That surely sounds paradoxical, doesn't it? How is it possible? Reuters explain the mystery: by drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, south Atlantic, and maybe the waters of Alaska, he wants to win the Republican support for his cap-and-trade bill! :-)

I am not sure whether he realizes the amazing irony in this strategy. It's very clear that unless it will really kill the U.S. economy, the cap-and-trade bill won't do a damn thing to reduce the production of CO2.




The European market with carbon indulgences has been active for 5 years. The result is that the growth of the consumption per capita of various fossil fuels grew more quickly (or decreased more slowly) in Europe than it did in America!

It is reasonable to expect that the same thing will hold for the hypothetical U.S. cap-and-trade framework. It's pretty clear that the hypothetical reduction of the consumption of fossil fuels achieved by the cap-and-trade bill will be much smaller than the increase of the consumption allowed by the drilling.

So it's preposterous to suggest that Obama is going to drill "to help to fight climate change". I think it's clear that he's giving the "fight" up, and it's painful that he doesn't have the courage to confess this obvious fact explicitly.



Obama on energy security.

Many other important politicians recently cooled down on the "fight". Arnold Schwarzenegger who opposes more drilling recently asked his bureaucracy to slow down the efforts to active the cap-and-trade system.

Former Hewlett-Packard boss Carly Fiorina, a GOP Senate candidate meant to replace James Inhofe's friend Barbara Boxer (CA), called the Californian global warming law an unbelievable job killer and wants to use many tools to scrap or deactivate AB 32.

ClimateGate Whitewash

As Gordon has pointed out, the U.K. Parliamentary committee has declared Phil Jones innocent. That shouldn't be shocking because both the Labour Party and the would-be Conservative Party have jumped on the AGW bandwagon and most of the individual politicians who currently represent these parties have been linked to this big scam. The two groups, AGW scientists and AGW politicians, are supporting each other.

Lord Nigel Lawson has made an unfortunate contribution to the Whitewash because in his testimony, he explicitly accepted the preposterous statement that the "trick" to "hide" something was a "neat way" to do something. Too bad that an important personality sometimes considered as a skeptic may be misled (or scared) in similar basic issues. Lawson may be viewed as a more self-restrained Gentleman, in comparison with e.g. Lord Christopher Monckton - but the latter knows much more about the climate and many of its details.

The corrupt politicians who constructed the committee so that it would become a Whitewash team have to be replaced. Before that takes place, the maximum we can hope for is that they won't do much harm - that they will act somewhat neutrally.

I would never send death threats but it is not hard to justify the action of a taxpayer who is being constantly pissed upon by the politicians and the scientists who belong to the same corrupt ring - a taxpayer who is livid and who feels it's necessary to take the justice into his hands. By manifestly fraudulent tactics, Phil Jones has collected GBP 13 million in grants - which is just a tiny fraction of the damages that the human society will have to pay for his greed combined with his dishonesty.

Meanwhile, an unexpected source, Channel 4, published a nasty piece on Stephen McIntyre who is supposed to be immoral because he was paid three air tickets and a speaking fee for his talk from three think tanks. What a crime! These compensations are at least 3 orders of magnitude lower than what Jones has received even though McIntyre clearly deserves at least by 3 orders of magnitude bigger rewards for his services to climate science than Phil Jones does.

Until at least some elementary justice is restored in this corrupt formerly scientific discipline, death threats will probably remain the only tool how these nasty organized crooks, thieves, and liars can be fought against. It's a pessimistic conclusion but it's likely to be true.

And that's the memo.

1 comment:

  1. The one MP who comes out of the Committee report is Graham Stringer, his minority postions are numerous and worth a second read.

    ReplyDelete