Environment

Fracking movie proposed

by Bob Weeks on February 8, 2012

Americans are just starting to become aware of the tremendous potential of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, as a method of producing oil, and especially, natural gas. Kansas has recently seen a flurry of activity in this area, and fracking is expected to provide many thousands of jobs for Kansas, along with cheaper energy.

Filmmakers Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer produced the 2009 film Not Evil Just Wrong that uncovered the myths and misinformation spread by radical environmental extremists.

Now the two have looked at fracking and hope to produce a documentary film on this topic. They hope to use a new method of financing the film — crowdfunding. Following is a press release announcing this effort. The link to the funding page is FrackNation: A documentary project in Los Angeles, CA by Ann and Phelim Media LLC.

Controversial filmmakers announce crowdfunding campaign for documentary to “expose the truth about fracking”

“FrackNation” investigates the alarming and apparently misleading claims made about fracking, and looks at the benefits the process can bring to some of the poorest communities in the U.S. and across the planet.

Los Angeles (February 8, 2012) — Controversial filmmakers Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer announced a crowdfunding campaign today for their new documentary, FrackNation.

The feature-length film looks at the process of fracking for natural gas, demolishing much of the scaremongering surrounding the process and featuring the millions whose lives have been positively transformed by this emerging industry. FrackNation investigates the health claims surrounding the process, and reveals the startling lack of scientific evidence to substantiate them.

Controversially, McAleer and McElhinney are fundraising for FrackNation on Kickstarter.com.

“Normally, Kickstarter projects are pro-radical environmentalism,” said McAleer. “FrackNation will be the first documentary funded through Kickstarter to challenge the environmental establishment. It will appeal to the workers and small farmers who know the truth, but never see it represented in modern documentaries.”

In a unique fundraising move, McAleer and McElhinney, a husband and wife filmmaking team, have announced that everyone who helps pay for FrackNation will become an executive producer on the film. “This will be a documentary funded by the people for the people,” said McAleer.

FrackNation comes on the heels of a new anti-fracking film is due to be released by activist filmmaker Josh Fox. Fox made Gasland, an Oscar-nominated film, which propelled fears about fracking into the public arena. Fox is now planning a HBO-funded Gasland sequel. Fox has received $750,000 to make the new documentary.

“The Hollywood/environmental establishment has wheeled out big bucks to tell its story,” said Ann McElhinney. “We’re just asking for $150,000. Ours will be a grassroots film telling real stories about real people across America and the world.”

The filmmakers say the documentary was inspired when they encountered journalistic censorship. McAleer questioned Fox at a Q&A following a screening of the film, during which Fox admitted the people could light their tap water long before fracking was introduced. The “lighting water” scene is one of the most famous parts of Gasland, and led to many of the scares surrounding the process.

“I was shocked when Fox said he this had existed in these areas decades before fracking. However, I was doubly shocked when Fox’s lawyers contacted me to take down my video of our Q&A which I posted on YouTube,” said McAleer. “Fox was trying to censor another journalist and that got me interested: What was he trying to hide?”

McAleer and McElhinney have already filmed in Pennsylvania, New York, California, Poland, and the U.K.

“FrackNation will feature small farmers, the working class and others who are benefiting from this economic boom. We will also look at the backgrounds and motives of those opposing fracking,” said McElhinney.

Contact: Mary Elizabeth Margolis
mary.margolis@storypartnersdc.com
(202) 706-7800

Tagged as: Environment

{ 0 comments }

CSAPR not friendly, not a ghost

by Guest Author on December 11, 2011

The following piece by Kansas Representative Dennis Hedke (district 99, Andover and parts of far east Wichita) illustrates another way in which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overreaches. Hedke is a geophysicist by training and profession.

Every citizen on the planet bears a responsibility toward stewardship of the environment. In the United States we have been blessed by much improved air and water quality over many decades of dedicated effort. There are, however, practical limits as to how far to push the envelope of “clean.”

The article presented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the Wichita Eagle on December 4, 2011 spoke to newly created rules placed on utilities, primarily targeted at coal-burning power plants. These new regulations fall within the “Cross-State Air Pollution Rule,” or CSAPR.

EPA claims it will “protect hundreds of million of Americans, providing up to $280 billion in benefits by preventing tens of thousands of premature deaths, asthma and heart attacks, and millions of lost days of school or work due to illness,” due to the cleanup of mercury, sulfur and nitrogen oxides, and other emissions.

Exactly where did the EPA come up with these incredible health benefits?

According to a Wall Street Journal citation on December 6, 2011, “… the EPA estimates that the benefits to society from mercury reductions in the utility rule max out at $6.1 million, total, while imposing $11 billion in compliance costs annually.”

Can the EPA cite for me, and the rest of Kansans who wish to know, evidence for any individual living within a 25 mile radius of the Jeffrey Energy Center near St. Mary’s, KS, who has experienced respiratory illness as a direct result of the emissions coming from that plant? Has there been a single lost day of school for any student in the St. Mary’s district due to the emissions coming from that plant? Has anyone lost a day of work as a direct result of emissions coming from that plant?

If and when EPA conducts an epidemiologic study to answer those questions, I predict the answers will be no, no, and no. The Kansas Department of Health and Environment has confirmed that no such studies have been conducted anywhere in Kansas.

Yet, the EPA would have us believe that they will be protecting hundreds of millions of Americans from multiple hazardous substances being emitted, and carried ‘downwind’ to Chicago, Pittsburgh, and of course New York City and EPA Headquarters in Washington, DC. I submit they would love to have our air quality. There is something very wrong with this picture.

Jeffrey Energy Center (through Westar ratepayers) has invested in excess of $600 million within the past decade to retrofit and materially reduce sulfur oxides by 82% and nitrogen oxides by 48%, and other particulates that may be in some way challenging the health profiles of residents proximate to the plant. Not enough according to the EPA.

Behind the scenes, EPA claims their models conflict with models of other entities, and that rolling brownouts and blackouts won’t happen next summer, as a result of mandatory plant shutdowns. That’s not what has been publicly reported by Westar and many others.

I’ll go with Westar, and the others.

Casper, please lend us a hand.

Tagged as: Environment, Regulation

{ 1 comment }

Kansas Governor Sam Brownback on wind energy

by Bob Weeks on September 14, 2011

Recently Kansas Governor Sam Brownback wrote an editorial praising the benefits of wind power. (Gov. Sam Brownback: Wind offers clean path to growth, September 11, 2011 Wichita Eagle) Brownback has also been supportive of another form of renewable energy, ethanol.

But not everyone agrees with the governor’s rosy assessment of wind power. Paul Chesser of American Tradition Institute offers a rebuttal of Brownback’s article, which first appeared in a Bloomberg publication.

Chesser writes: “Apparently Gov. Brownback has overlooked the horrid results of efforts in recent years to spur the economy and employment with government renewable energy ‘stimulation’ from taxpayer dollars. … The lessons of failure with government mandates in pursuit of a renewable energy economy are not hard to find.”

Chesser goes on to describe ATI’s study which illustrates the negative economic consequences of renewsable energy standards, which Brownback has supported. The study is The Effects of Federal Renewable Portfolio Standard Legislation on the U.S. Economy.

Following is Chesser’s response to Governor Brownback.

Kansas Gov., Former Sen. Brownback Incorrect on Promise, Economics of Renewable Energy

By Paul Chesser

American Tradition Institute today called attention to the many fallacies in a column written by Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback and published yesterday in the Bloomberg Government newsletter (subscription required), in which the former U.S. Senator touted the “long-term benefits” and “job creation” ability of renewable energy, predominantly with wind power.

Apparently Gov. Brownback has overlooked the horrid results of efforts in recent years to spur the economy and employment with government renewable energy “stimulation” from taxpayer dollars. He wrote for Bloomberg, “Experience has taught us that investments in the renewable energy economy is creating jobs across all employment sectors, including construction, engineering, operations, technology and professional services, in both rural and urban communities.”

“Unlike most of his fellow Republicans, it sounds like the governor continues to support President Obama’s failed initiatives to create ‘Green jobs’ in a hopeless attempt to save the U.S. economy,” said Paul Chesser, executive director of American Tradition Institute.

Continue reading at ATI Release: Kansas Gov., Former Sen. Brownback Incorrect on Promise, Economics of Renewable Energy.

Tagged as: Climate change, Economics, Environment, Global warming alarmism, Kansas state government, Sam Brownback, Wind power

{ 2 comments }

Study looks at spending, strategy in cap and trade debate

by Bob Weeks on April 26, 2011

While those who advocate cap and trade legislation charge that conservatives, particularly Charles and David Koch, have outspent them, a study finds the opposite.

According to American University Professor Matthew Nisbet, in 2009 environmental groups spent $394 million on climate change and energy policy efforts such as promoting cap and trade. Opposition groups spent $259 million. Information like this helps place the reports of conservative spending, including that of Charles and David Koch, in perspective. Without this, we’re left with the one-sided reports from Greenpeace and the New Yorker magazine, in which numbers are mentioned without — or with little — context.

Nesbit’s report is Climate Shift: Clear Vision for the Next Decade of Public Debate.

The report also looks at expenditures on lobbying. In this area, it’s less clear how much was spent lobbying for or against cap and trade legislation, as companies and organizations report their total spending on all lobbying activity, not the amount spent on specific bills. In this light, Nisbet reports that “environmental groups were able to forge a network of organizations that spent a combined $229 million on lobbying across all issues. In comparison, the network of prominent opponents of cap and trade legislation spent $272 million lobbying across all issues.”

Spending on elections is mixed. Considering contributions to members of Congress, proponents of cap and trade legislation outspent opponents. But in independent expenditures, the situation is reversed. But on Proposition 23 in California, environmental groups spent the most.

In conclusion to its chapter on spending, the report states: “… propelled by a wealthy donor base and key alliances with corporations and other organizations, the environmental movement appears to have closed the financial gap with its opponents among conservative groups and industry associations. Indeed, the effort to pass cap and trade legislation may have been the best-financed political cause in American history. The effort also demonstrates not only the vast revenue base and organizational capacity of the environmental movement, but also the movement’s enhanced ability to coordinate activities among its constituent members and to build partnerships.”

Climate Change Advocacy: Revenues, Spending, and Activities

By Matthew Nisbit

After the failure of the Senate cap and trade bill in August 2010, many commentators blamed the bill’s demise on the massive spending by fossil fuel companies, industry associations and their conservative allies. Others, however, noted that environmental groups—joined by dozens of leading companies and organizations—had devoted record amounts of financial resources in an effort to pass the bill. As an unnamed Obama administration official said about environmental groups, “They spent like $100 million and they weren’t able to get a single Republican convert on the bill.”

To better understand the influence of spending in the cap and trade debate, in this chapter I review the nature, composition and funding sources of the U.S. environmental movement and compare these factors to the opposing coalition of conservative think tanks and industry associations. Then, analyzing data compiled from tax returns, annual reports, and other sources, I systematically compare the revenue and forms of spending by both sides in the debate.

Though most environmental groups are limited in how much money they can devote to direct lobbying, in the debate over cap and trade, they were able to spend heavily on efforts to educate the public and policymakers on the need for a mandatory emissions cap, hiring the country’s top political consultants. They also invested in partnerships with corporations and other organizations in a strategy aimed at counter-balancing the amount spent on lobbying by opposing industry associations and companies.

As the analysis indicates, the environmental movement has made sizable gains in closing the spending gap with their conservative and industry opponents. Indeed, the effort to pass cap and trade legislation may have been the best-financed political cause in American history. The effort also demonstrates not only the vast revenue base and organizational capacity of the environmental movement, but also the movement’s enhanced ability to coordinate activities among its constituent members and to build alliances.

Continue reading from Chapter 1 of Climate Shift: Clear Vision for the Next Decade of Public Debate

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism, Koch Industries

{ 2 comments }

More left-liberal environmental hypocrisy

by Bob Weeks on February 3, 2011

This time it’s Robert Redford caught in a few “do as I say, not as I do” moments. He opposes environmentally-friendly development near a vineyard he owns, as reported in the New York Times: “Robert Redford, the actor and environmental superhero, is a vocal supporter of renewable power and sustainable growth — but it seems that doesn’t include a proposal for an ecofriendly housing development in his corner of the Napa Valley.”

But if you have $1,975,000 he’ll sell you a lot for a luxury vacation home.

He campaigns against the use of oil — while at the same time being paid by United Airlines to create advertisements encouraging flying.

Filmmakers Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer have put together a short film that illustrates. View it below or in glorious high-definition at Robert Redford Hypocrite.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

{ 4 comments }

Global warming alarmism: the money motive

by Bob Weeks on November 23, 2010

The motives of global warming alarmists, who insist that mankind must ratchet back economic progress in order to save the earth’s climate: Are these motives pure and scientific, or are there other forces in play?

Many have suspected that the global warming battle is more a war against capitalism than anything else. Now new information is revealed that reinforces these suspicions. As Investor’s Business Daily tells it: “Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change (say that twice), told the Neue Zurcher Zeitung last week: ‘The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War.’ After all, redistributing global wealth is no small matter.”

The Climate Cash Cow

Investor’s Business Daily

Hoaxes: A high-ranking member of the U.N.’s Panel on Climate Change admits the group’s primary goal is the redistribution of wealth and not environmental protection or saving the Earth.

Money, they say, is the root of all evil. It’s also the motivating force behind what is left of the climate change movement after the devastating Climate-gate and IPCC scandals that saw the deliberate manipulation of scientific data to spur the world into taking draconian regulatory action.

Left for dead, global warm-mongers are busy planning their next move, which should occur at a climate conference in relatively balmy Cancun at month’s end. Certainly it should provide a more appropriate venue for discussing global warming than the site of the last failed climate conference — chilly Copenhagen.

Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change (say that twice), told the Neue Zurcher Zeitung last week: “The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War.” After all, redistributing global wealth is no small matter.

Edenhofer let the environmental cat out of the bag when he said “climate policy is redistributing the world’s wealth” and that “it’s a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization.”

Continue reading at Investor’s Business Daily.

Tagged as: Capitalism, Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

{ 5 comments }

Fifteen bad things with wind power — and three reasons why

by Bob Weeks on September 21, 2010

Here’s an article full of important observations about the drive to produce more of our electricity from wind power. For example, promoters of wind (and solar) say we can use it to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. But this article points out that only one percent of our electricity is generated from oil.

Another important observation has to do with the high cost of electricity generated by wind: “Along the way, yet another claim has been made: that wind energy is low cost. This is surprisingly bold considering that if that was really true, then why would any RES be necessary? For some reason all ‘calculations’ showing wind to be low cost conveniently ignore exorbitant subsidies, extra backup and balancing costs, additional transmission costs, etc.”

That’s a simple and brilliant observation: if electricity from wind is so cheap to produce, why do utilities have to be forced — and subsidized — to produce it?

Fifteen Bad Things with Windpower–and Three Reasons Why

By John Droz Jr.

Trying to pin down the arguments of wind promoters is a bit like trying to grab a greased balloon. Just when you think you’ve got a handle on it, it squirts away. Let’s take a quick highlight review of how things have evolved.

1 — Wind energy was abandoned well over a hundred years ago, as it was totally inconsistent with our burgeoning more modern needs of power, even in the late 1800s. When we throw the switch, we expect that the lights will go on — 100% of the time. It’s not possible for wind energy, by itself, to ever do this, which is one of the main reasons it was relegated to the dust bin of antiquated technologies (along with such other inadequate sources like horse power).

2 — Fast forward to several years ago. With politicians being convinced by lobbyists that Anthropological Global Warming (AGW) was an imminent threat, a campaign was begun to favor all things that would purportedly reduce CO2. Wind energy was thus resurrected, as its marketers pushed the fact that wind turbines did not produce CO2 in their generation of electricity.

Continue reading at MasterResource: A free-market energy blog

Tagged as: Environment, Global warming alarmism, Wind power

{ 3 comments }

The Climategate Whitewash Continues

by Bob Weeks on July 14, 2010

Last year’s disclosure of email correspondence between climate scientists was a wake-up call to the world. The emails showed leading climate scientists exhibiting “professional misconduct, data manipulation and jiggering of both the scientific literature and climatic data.”

Since then, there have been several reviews of this episode, each finding there was no untoward behavior by the scientists. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Patrick J. Michaels takes a look at these reviews and finds that their purported independence is not as advertised.

The Climategate Whitewash Continues

Global warming alarmists claim vindication after last year’s data manipulation scandal. Don’t believe the ‘independent’ reviews.

Last November there was a world-wide outcry when a trove of emails were released suggesting some of the world’s leading climate scientists engaged in professional misconduct, data manipulation and jiggering of both the scientific literature and climatic data to paint what scientist Keith Briffa called “a nice, tidy story” of climate history. The scandal became known as Climategate.

Now a supposedly independent review of the evidence says, in effect, “nothing to see here.” Last week “The Independent Climate Change E-mails Review,” commissioned and paid for by the University of East Anglia, exonerated the University of East Anglia. The review committee was chaired by Sir Muir Russell, former vice chancellor at the University of Glasgow.

Continue reading at the Wall Street Journal

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

{ 0 comments }

Global warming to be topic at Wichita presentation

by Bob Weeks on June 7, 2010

This Friday (June 11) the Wichita Pachyderm Club features Mike Smith, C.C.M. of WeatherData Services, Inc. as its guest presenter. His topic will be “An Atmospheric Scientist Looks at Global Warming.” I have seen this presentation, and it is very informative and should not be missed.

This special presentation will end at 1:15 pm instead of the usual 1:00 pm ending time.

All are welcome to attend Wichita Pachyderm Club meetings. The program costs $10, which includes a delicious buffet lunch including salad, soup, two main dishes, and ice tea and coffee. The meeting starts at noon, although it’s recommended to arrive fifteen minutes early to get your lunch before the program starts.

The Wichita Petroleum Club is on the ninth floor of the Bank of America Building at 100 N. Broadway (north side of Douglas between Topeka and Broadway) in Wichita, Kansas (click for a map and directions). You may park in the garage (enter west side of Broadway between Douglas and First Streets) and use the sky walk to enter the Bank of America building. The Petroleum Club will stamp your parking ticket and the fee will be only $1.00. Or, there is usually some metered and free street parking nearby.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism, Wichita Pachyderm Club

{ 1 comment }

Greenpeace climate change extremists are hot on the trail

April 22, 2010

Climate change — its reality (or not) and man’s response to it — is an important topic and deserves serious discussion. The actions of one of the most prominent and vocal groups promoting a radical global warming agenda, however, aren’t fostering greater understanding of the issue, much less an informed debate.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism, Koch Industries

Read the full article →

Greenpeace report on Koch Industries criticized

April 7, 2010

Last week’s report on Koch Industries by Greenpeace has sparked a bit of critical discussion beyond the usual news coverage.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Greenpeace attack on Koch Industries exaggerates, misleads

April 1, 2010

This week’s release of a report by the extremist environmental group Greenpeace on Wichita-based Koch Industries contains claims that exaggerate the nature of the information contained in the report. These over-hyped “findings” are used to advance Greenpeace’s global warming alarmist agenda, but should give us cause to examine Greenpeace and its agenda.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Greenpeace report aims to stifle debate on climate science

March 31, 2010

Wichita’s Koch Industries has come under attack from an environmental extremist organization for its support of open debate and dialog about the science of climate change.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Global Warming: Hoax or Reality?

January 22, 2010

Wichita’s Dennis Hedke will appear at two forums at Johnson County Community College that will explore the topic of climate change. The documentary film Not Evil Just Wrong — the antidote to Al Gore and global warming extremism — will be shown, too. My review of this film is at ‘Not Evil Just Wrong’ a powerful refutation of Al Gore, environmental extremism. Following is a pres release announcing the event.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Wall Street Journal guide to climate change

January 7, 2010

The editorial page of the Wall Street Journal is one of the most valuable resources for information on economics and politics. A while back the Journal launched The WSJ Guide to ObamaCare. Now there’s a guide to Journal editorials and op-eds on climate change available at Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Climate change information site launched by Wichita geophysicist

December 9, 2009

Wichita Geophysicist Dennis Hedke has compiled a great deal of useful information that he uses in making presentations on the science, economics, and politics of climate change and global warming alarmism.

Now he’s compiled his material and made it available on his new website HeadOnIssues.org.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Don’t forfeit Kansas’ economic future to the United Nations

December 7, 2009

The global warming debate is at a crossroads. With a skeptical American public already rising up against a cap-and-trade scheme that would send energy prices through the roof, a whistleblower at the influential Climate Research Unit revealing that the temperature data used to make the case for global warming was badly manipulated, predictions of yet another cold winter, and the fact it has been nearly a decade since global temperatures stopped rising.

Tagged as: Barack Obama, Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism, Taxation

Read the full article →

Copenhagen to Wichita, lunch provided

December 7, 2009

As part AFP’s ongoing Hot Air Tour, we will be hosting a viewing party in Wichita at the Hyatt Regency Hotel and in Overland Park at the Doubletree Hotel of our Simulcast live from Copenhagen on the same day the President is there to make sure that the truth is told.

Tagged as: Americans For Prosperity, Climate change, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Here’s how to maybe solve global warming

October 29, 2009

One of the problems in the global warming debate is that the warmists advocate a solution that’s very painful: moving away from fossil fuels. Alternatives are not mentioned or considered.

A reason for this is that the war on fossil fuels is a thinly disguised war on capitalism and human economic freedom. That’s a big reason why environmental extremists don’t want to consider other solutions. If they can save the earth and kill capitalism and humanity at the same time, this false crisis has surely not been wasted, then.

Tagged as: Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

‘Not Evil Just Wrong’ a powerful refutation of Al Gore, environmental extremism

October 15, 2009

The new documentary film Not Evil Just Wrong will cause viewers to wonder why we pay global warming alarmists, particularly former vice-president Al Gore, any attention at all?

The answer, of course, is that many people believe the nonsense that Gore and others spread about the threat of climate change. They’re working hard to pass laws and policies that will harm our lives and our economies — and they’re doing this to confront a threat that doesn’t exist.

Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth, despite its errors, is used by environmental extremists as evidence that rapid warming is occurring, and that humans must take extreme measures to combat it.

Now we have an persuasive and effective rebuttal.

Read the full article →

Kansas should not repeat Europe’s mistakes

September 30, 2009

Not for the first time, the prosperity of thousands of Kansans rests in the hands of politicians more than 1,000 miles removed in Washington, D.C. In the next few weeks politicians will decide whether to embrace the hype about manmade “climate change” and impose a costly global warming tax to address it.

Some Americans believe the country needs to adopt more “European” policies such as “cap and trade” which would ration the use of fossil fuels and drastically push up energy prices. But many other Americans fear the legislation now before the Senate will spell an end to the American dream.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

‘Not Evil Just Wrong’ filmmaker tells of harms of radical environmentalists

September 29, 2009

Watching the film she made, I became angry. After talking with her, I feel better, but I’m still angry.

She’s Ann McElhinney. The film she made is Not Evil Just Wrong. It’s a very powerful antidote to former vice president Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth and the extremism it has generated.

Tagged as: Capitalism, Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Cap-and-trade admitted to be tax

September 17, 2009

Thinking people have known this all along, and now we know that the Treasury Department believes that proposed cap-and-trade legislation — the Waxman-Markey bill — is really a tax in disguise.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism, Taxation

Read the full article →

Not all birds are equal, it seems

September 14, 2009

Recently ExxonMobil plead guilty to killing 85 birds. It paid $600,000 in fines and fees. An Oregon electric utility paid $1.4 million in fines for killing 232s eagle that had come into contact with poorly-designed power lines. Wind energy producers, however, can kill with impunity.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Wind power

Read the full article →

Waxman-Markey costly, ineffective

August 25, 2009

The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade legislation that is working its way through Congress is ineffective in its stated goal, and will harm the American economy.

The goal of this bill is to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere, thereby reducing the threat of global warming. The amount of temperature reduction Waxman-Markey might produce is a matter of dispute, but most sources cite a decrease so small that it will be difficult to measure it. Its effect could easily be overwhelmed by something else over which we have no control.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism, United States Congress

Read the full article →

If this is recycling profit, let’s skip it

August 11, 2009

A letter-writer to the Wichita Eagle states “In Washington state, we participate in a nearly effortless, profitable and environmentally important recycling program.”

A paragraph later she writes “The cost of recycling is $5 a month on our refuse bill.”

I don’t know: Do these statements contradict each other?

Tagged as: Environment, Recycling

Read the full article →

The Cap and Tax Fiction

July 19, 2009

There’s been a of of joy among the radical environmentalists lately since the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) came out with a report that seems to say that the costs of the pending cap and trade legislation — the Waxman-Markey bill — is small.

At a annual cost of $175 per household, that shouldn’t be much to worry about, should it?

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

Global warming testimony released

July 17, 2009

In May, Wichita geophysicist Dennis Hedke traveled to Arlington, Virginia to deliver testimony at a public hearing conducted by the Environmental protection Agency, or EPA. Now Hedke has released the document that he delivered to the EPA. You can read it in its entirety at the end of this article. Here are some highlights.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Global warming alarmism

Read the full article →

Global warming to be examined in Wichita

July 8, 2009

At this Friday’s meeting of the Wichita Pachyderm Club, Wichita geophysicist Dennis Hedke will present important information about the topics of global warming and climate change. His presentation includes information about the science behind these matters, and also about the politics. That’s important, as it appears now that the driving force behind the Obama administration’s energy and climate policy is politics as much as anything else.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

In Obama administration, transparency and science take backseat to politics

July 7, 2009

President Barack Obama has promised to make transparency the standard for his administration. He also pledged to base decisions such as our nation’s energy policy on science.

As reported on this site, the Competitive Enterprise Institute uncovered a series of email messages within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that raise questions as to how seriously these goals are followed.

Tagged as: Barack Obama, Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

Kansans will be hurt by global warming bill

June 25, 2009

The Waxman-Markey climate bill, soon to be considered by Congress, will harm all Americans. Here’s a look at what it would cost Kansans.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

EPA suppresses internal global warming study

June 24, 2009

Is there any doubt that the crusade against global warming is motivated as much by politics as by anything else?

The Competitive Enterprise Institute has uncovered an effort within the Environmental Protection Agency to suppress “scientific analysis of climate change because of political pressure to support the Administration’s policy agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.”

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

Earthjustice meddles in Kansas again

June 22, 2009

The radical environmentalist group Earthjustice is again meddling in Kansas energy policy. They’ve sent a “warning letter” to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.

Tagged as: Climate change, Earthjustice, Environment, Kansas state government, Kathleen Sebelius, Rod Bremby

Read the full article →

Environmental myths of the Left

June 22, 2009

One of the powerful stories radical environmentalists — or any environmentalists for that matter — tell is how the river in Cleveland caught on fire. Water burning: that’s a real environmental disaster. Government must step in a do something!

Today the Competitive Enterprise Institute tells the true story. It turns out that it was not capitalism gone wild that caused the fire, but too much government and lack of property rights.

Tagged as: Capitalism, Environment, Property rights, Regulation

Read the full article →

The Threat of Big Brother in Green Clothing

June 10, 2009

From the Competitive Enterprise Institute. This organization, particularly its site GlobalWarming.org, is a great place to look for information about the true nature of global warming and climate change. The following announces the release of a video message that spotlights the real threat of global warming fear mongering.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment, Liberty, Regulation

Read the full article →

‘Story of Stuff’ video attempts to shame us into depression

June 9, 2009

A video claiming that American-style capitalism is ruining the earth is making its way into our nation’s schools as “a sleeper hit in classrooms across the nation,” according to a story on the front page of the New York Times in May.

It’s produced by one Annie Leonard, described in the Times as “a former Greenpeace employee and an independent lecturer.” It’s a depressing video to watch.

Tagged as: Capitalism, Education, Environment

Read the full article →

More doubt about man-made global warming

June 8, 2009

The evidence that global warming is a man-made phenomenon continues to fall under sharp questioning and doubt.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

More myths of green jobs

June 7, 2009

On its surface, a seemingly strong argument for adopting a national policy of increasing reliance on renewable energy is all the jobs and economic growth that will result. It’s claimed by some that the switch to so-called “green” sources of energy will pay for itself this way.

Tagged as: Climate change, Economics, Environment

Read the full article →

Why climate models are wrong

June 4, 2009

Could the science behind all the models that predict global warming be wrong? Dr. Roy Spencer believes it is. His article A Layman’s Explanation of Why Global Warming Predictions by Climate Models are Wrong takes a while to read, but it’s worth the time and effort.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

Another Kansas electricity rate hike

June 4, 2009

Kansas cusomers served by electric utility Westar are facing another rate increase. It’s a “follow-up” rate increase, coming after several other recent rate increases. The purpose is to pay for “the second phase of its Emporia Energy Center and two Westar-owned wind farms.”

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

Another Evangelical’s view of creation

June 2, 2009

Wichita Geophysicist Dennis Hedke explains the problems with the beliefs held by radical environmentalist Rev. Richard Cizik. This is the unabridged version of a letter that appeared in the Wichita Eagle.

Tagged as: Climate change, Environment

Read the full article →

← Previous Entries