-- Scotts Contracting - StLouis Renewable Energy: EPA Climate Change Issue

Search This Blog

Showing posts with label EPA Climate Change Issue. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPA Climate Change Issue. Show all posts

6.27.2015

ClimateChangeKids Challenge Government and Win

Timeline Photos






The future is borrowed from the Youth.  

8 Oregon Kids I dubbed the #ClimateChangeKids just accomplished what many of their elders have failed to do.  They took the bull by the horn in the Court System, Lost, Appealed, and Won.  And have used Climate Science as the tool that will ensure their State meets carbon emission standards by getting the US Court to direct: to apply the agency’s own findings that climate change presents an imminent threat to Washington and demands immediate action, The agency must use: the most current and best available climate science when deciding to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

Kids understand the threats climate change will have on our future,” said 13-year-old petitioner Zoe Foster. “I’m not going to sit by and watch my government do nothing. We don’t have time to waste. I’m pushing my government to take real action on climate, and I won’t stop until change is made.” 


— Our Children's Trust (@OCTorg) June 24, 2015

The effect of this decision is that for the first time in the United States, a court of law has ordered a state agency to consider the most current and best available climate science when deciding to regulate carbon dioxide emissions,” said Andrea Rodgers of the Western Environmental Law Center, attorney for the youth petitioners. “The court directed Ecology to apply the agency’s own findings that climate change presents an imminent threat to Washington and demands immediate action. The ball is now in Ecology’s court to do the right thing and protect our children and future generations.” 



BREAKING: Washington State Youth Win Unprecedented Decision in their Climate Change Lawsuit! #350ppm #climatejustice

Washington State Youth Win Unprecedented Decision in their Climate Change Lawsuit Judge Orders Washington Environmental Agency to Consider Youth-Proposed Carbon Dioxide Reductions.    Read the full press release and decision here: http://ourchildrenstrust.org/sites/default/files/15.06.24WADecisionPR.pdf

June 24, 2015 For inquiries or interview requests, please contact: Andrea Rodgers 206-696-2851 rodgers@westernlaw.org Julia Olson 415-786-4825 julia@ourchildrenstrust.org Washington State Youth Win Unprecedented Decision in their Climate Change Lawsuit Judge Orders Washington Environmental Agency to Consider Youth-Proposed Carbon Dioxide Reductions Seattle, Washington – On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Hollis Hill issued a landmark decision in Zoe & Stella Foster v. Washington Department of Ecology, the climate change case brought by eight young citizens of Washington State. In her decision, Judge Hill ordered the Washington Department of Ecology (“Ecology”) to reconsider the petition the eight youth filed with Ecology last year asking for carbon dioxide reductions, and to report back to the court by July 8, 2015, as to whether they will consider the undisputed current science necessary for climate recovery. Last June, the young petitioners filed a petition for rulemaking to Ecology requesting that the agency promulgate a rule that would limit carbon dioxide emissions in Washington according to what scientists say is needed to protect our oceans and climate system. The youth also asked Ecology to inform the Legislature that existing statutory greenhouse gas reductions must be revised based on current climate science. On August 14, 2014, Ecology denied the petition without disputing the underlying scientific bases for petitioner’s plea. Arguing that they have a fundamental right to a healthy environment, and that they are faced with increasing harms posed by climate destabilization and ocean acidification, the young petitioners filed an appeal of the denial to vindicate this right on behalf of themselves and future generations. “The effect of this decision is that for the first time in the United States, a court of law has ordered a state agency to consider the most current and best available climate science when deciding to regulate carbon dioxide emissions,” said Andrea Rodgers of the Western Environmental Law Center, attorney for the youth petitioners. “The court directed Ecology to apply the agency’s own findings that climate change presents an imminent threat to Washington and demands immediate action. The ball is now in Ecology’s court to do the right thing and protect our children and future generations.” In a footnote to her order, Judge Hill explained her plain reasoning for rejecting Ecology’s plan to delay action, referencing a December 2014 report from Ecology: “Ecology suggests no change in greenhouse gas reduction standards until after an international climate conference scheduled in Paris in December 2015, thus delaying action for at least a year from the date of the report or one year and five months after the report’s original due date. Neither in its briefing nor in oral argument of this appeal did the Department seek to justify this suggested delay. The report itself states that after the Paris conference Washington would be better informed how the state’s limits should be adjusted.” “Kids understand the threats climate change will have on our future,” said 13-year-old petitioner Zoe Foster. “I’m not going to sit by and watch my government do nothing. We don’t have time to waste. I’m pushing my government to take real action on climate, and I won’t stop until change is made.” The court’s opinion acknowledges that climate change is currently happening and will have devastating impacts on the natural environment of Washington. Citing Ecology’s December report, the court wrote: “Washington State’s existing statutory limits should be adjusted to better reflect the current science. The limits need to be more aggressive in order for Washington to do its part to address climate risks.” Ecology has recognized that “we are imposing risks on future generations (causing intergenerational inequities) and liability for the harm that will be caused by climate change that we are unable or unwilling to avoid.” Current climate science finds that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels must be reduced from the current global annual mean concentration of 401 parts per million, to 350 ppm by 2100 in order to achieve 1 climate stabilization and protect our oceans from catastrophic acidification. “This encouraging court decision reminds us that there is still good basis for optimism about legal strategies that aim to require governments to draft an action plan consistent with a more stringent mitigation target than the ones that are commonly discussed,” said the youth’s expert, NASA climate scientist Dr. Pushker Kharecha. “I hope the Department of Ecology realizes that such a plan would be 2 more achievable than they think in this case, and that they will therefore choose to amend their decision accordingly.” “This is a decision of immense national significance,” said Julia Olson, executive director of Our Children’s Trust, the nonprofit spearheading similar cases around the country. “Judge Hill acknowledges the urgent and dire acceleration of global warming, refuses to accept any more bureaucratic delay, and mandates that the State consider and act in just two weeks time on the youth’s scientific evidence that atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide must be reduced to 350 ppm. This judge understands the role of the NOAA, Global Greenhouse Reference Network, Global CO2 for April 2015 (http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/ 1 global.html). Dr. Pushker Kharecha is a climate scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (http://www.giss.nasa.gov/ 2 staff/pkharecha.html) and Columbia University Earth Institute (http://www.earth.columbia.edu/eidirectory/displayuser.php? userid=1860). judiciary to enforce citizen’s rights to fair evaluation of their grounded petitions and the critical urgency that government act substantively and without delay to protect the state’s resources and the children who depend on them.” “The court's decision brings a feeling of triumph,” said 14-year-old petitioner Aji Piper. “But I know there is still a lot of work to be done. We may have one a battle, but we're still fighting a bigger war.” The youth petitioners acted with the help of Our Children’s Trust, an Oregon-based nonprofit orchestrating a global, game-changing, youth-driven legal campaign to establish the right to a healthy atmosphere and stable climate. The legal effort advances the fundamental duty of government today: to address the climate crisis based on scientific baselines and benchmarks, and to do so within timeframes determined by scientific analysis. Our Children's Trust is a nonprofit organization advocating for urgent emissions reductions on behalf of youth and future generations, who have the most to lose if emissions are not reduced. OCT is spearheading the international human rights and environmental TRUST Campaign to compel governments to safeguard the atmosphere as a "public trust" resource. We use law, film, and media to elevate their compelling voices. Our ultimate goal is for governments to adopt and implement enforceable science-based Climate Recovery Plans with annual emissions reductions to return to an atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration of 350 ppm. www.ourchildrenstrust.org/ The Western Environmental Law Center is a public interest nonprofit law firm. WELC combines legal skills with sound conservation biology and environmental science to address major environmental issues throughout the West. WELC does not charge clients and partners for services, but relies instead on charitable gifts from individuals, families, and foundations to accomplish its mission. http://www.westernlaw.org ###

 NOAA, Global Greenhouse Reference Network, Global CO2 for April 2015 (http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/ 1 global.html). Dr. Pushker Kharecha is a climate scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (http://www.giss.nasa.gov/ 2 staff/pkharecha.html) and Columbia University Earth Institute (http://www.earth.columbia.edu/eidirectory/displayuser.php? userid=1860). 








Thank You for stopping by-Share and Comment below. If additional information in needed or you have a question let me know. Together we can make a difference and create a future that will benefit everyone. Build a Green StLouis Green Building Tips and Resources via: Scotty- St Louis Renewable Energy Green Blog
-->

6.22.2015

EPA June 22 Climate Change Report

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 22, 2015
 
EPA Report: For the US, Global Action Now Saves Lives and Avoids Significant Climate Change Damages

WASHINGTON –The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today released one of the most comprehensive analyses to date on the economic, health and environmental benefits to the United States of global climate action.  The peer-reviewed report, "Climate Change in the United States: Benefits of Global Action," examines how future impacts and damages of climate change across a number of sectors in the United States can be avoided or reduced with global action. The report compares two future scenarios: a future with significant global action on climate change, where global warming has been limited to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), and a future with no action on climate change (where global temperatures rise 9 degrees Fahrenheit).  The report then quantifies the differences in health, infrastructure and ecosystem impacts under the two scenarios, producing estimates of the costs of inaction and the benefits of reducing global GHG emissions. 

“Will the United States benefit from climate action? Absolutely. This report shows us how costly inaction will be to Americans’ health, our environment and our society. But more importantly, it helps us understand the magnitude of benefits to a number of sectors of the U.S. with global climate action,” said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. “We can save tens of thousands of American lives, and hundreds of billions of dollars, annually in the United States by the end of this century, but the sooner we act, thebetter off America and future generations of Americans will be.”

The report examines how the impacts and damages of climate change across a number of sectors in the United States can be avoided with global action.   The findings include:

• Global action on climate change reduces the frequency of extreme weather events and associated impacts.  For example, by 2100 global action on climate change is projected to avoid an estimated 12,000 deaths annually associated with extreme temperatures in 49 U.S. cities, compared to a future with no reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. This is more than a 90 percent reduction from what we would expect with no action.

• Global action now leads to greater benefits over time. The decisions we make today will have long-term effects, and future generations will either benefit from, or be burdened by, our current actions. Compared to a future with unchecked climate change, climate action is projected to avoid approximately 13,000 deaths in 2050 and 57,000 deaths in 2100 from poor air quality. Delaying action on emissions reductions will likely reduce these and other benefits.

• Global action on climate change avoids costly damages in the United States. For nearly all of the 20 sectors studied, global action on climate change significantly reduces the economic damages of climate change. For example, without climate action, we estimated up to $10 billion in increased road maintenance costs each year by the end of the century.  With action, we can avoid up to $7 billion of these damages.

• Climate change impacts are not equally distributed. Some regions of the United States are more vulnerable than others and will bear greater impacts. For example, without action on climate change, California is projected to face increasing risk of drought, the Rocky Mountain region will see significant increases in wildfires, and the mid-Atlantic and Southeast are projected to experience infrastructure damage from extreme temperatures, heavy rainfall, sea level rise, and storm surge. 

• Adaptation can reduce damages and costs. For some sectors, adaptation can substantially reduce the impacts of climate change. For example, in a future without greenhouse gas reductions, estimated damages from sea-level rise and storm surge to coastal property in the lower 48 states are $5.0 trillion dollars through 2100.  With adaptation along the coast, the estimated damages and adaptation costs are reduced to $810 billion.
The report is a product of the Climate Change Impacts and Risks Analysis (CIRA) project, led by EPA in collaboration with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Pacific Northwest National Lab, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and other partners.  The CIRA project is one of the first efforts to quantify the benefits of global action on climate change across a large number of U.S. sectors using a common analytic framework and consistent underlying data inputs.  The project spans 20 U.S. sectors related to health, infrastructure, electricity, water resources, agriculture and forestry, and ecosystems.

Explore the report: www2.epa.gov/cira
See a short video: https://youtu.be/_Iz0NKA1yuo
Register for a public webinar on report scope and findings:
June 22, 2015 at 3 p.m. EST

June 23, 2015 at 3:30 p.m. EST:




Thank You for stopping by-Share and Comment below. If additional information in needed or you have a question let me know. Together we can make a difference and create a future that will benefit everyone. Build a Green StLouis Green Building Tips and Resources via: Scotty- St Louis Renewable Energy Green Blog
-->

4.15.2011

Another Example-GOP Out of Touch With America

I ask myself what is the big deal with stopping Pollution from Fossil Fuels and GHG's? 

? Doesn't everyone want to be healthy? 

Why is it wrong to Protecting the Environment? 

? Do the Republicans understand that when they cut health care and then Remove Environmental Safe Guards that "We the People" could get sick and then not have any access to Health Care because they have DE-Funded the Programs?

Ms Lisa Jackson, Administrator for the EPA cites:
  • 60 percent of Americans believe the E.P.A. “needs to hold polluters accountable,”

  • 75% of Americans favor tougher regulations on pollution in order to protect our air and water

  • the contamination of our soil and water is the #1 issue for Americans

These are just some of the questions I asked myself.  To attempt to learn why the GOP is so Short-Sighted and not protecting the America they say they so strongly care for. I started looking and searching into why the Republicans are voting the way they are.

Through the Power of the Internet (which they are also trying to curtail) I found the Open Secrets Web Site.

OpenSecrets.org is your nonpartisan guide to money’s influence on U.S. elections and public policy. Whether you’re a voter, journalist, activist, student or interested citizen, use our free site to shine light on your government. Count cash and make change
.

I Found out who the Top Oil and Gas Contributors were in 2009-2010.  In the graph below you will see the Republicans in RED and the Democrats in BLUE and you can see for yourself which party receives the Largest Contributions.

I don't own a Calculator that will add figures into the Multi Billions of Dollars.  What I do know is that if the Oil and Gas Companies have that much money to spend on Lobbying the Republican Party;  Then "We the People" are getting screwed over when we pay to fill up at the Gas Pumps.

If they weren't Lobbying Multi Billion Dollars to Buy the Republican Party OFF to vote for Dirty Fossil Fuels and decreased Regulations on GHG's our/ "We the People" Gas Prices Would be Lower. 

I feel this is a personal assault against the Average American and Small Business.  We are the Major Supporters of the US Government through the Taxes that are levied against our paychecks and through the Goods and Services we depend on. 

Through the News Networks: CNN, HLN, CNBC I've learned that the Major Corporations are not paying their fair share of Taxes.  So this leaves "We the Average Citizens" paying more taxes to support the "Wasteful Government Spending"

I don't have a solution but I do know that there needs to be some changes made in the way our Government operates.

Here are just some of the things I do and are planning to do and urge all concerned American Citizens to the same.
  1. I will vote a Straight Democratic Ticket for the First Time in my Life in the Up-Coming Elections.  (I don't agree with many of their views but the Alternative is Worse.)
  2. I have contacted my Government Representatives through this web site and let my voice be heard- I suggest that Every Concerned American Do The Same
  3. Stay Active in the Political Discussions.  I post frequent Articles on my Web Sites: St Louis Renewable Energy and Scotts Contracting  That highlight the GOP Republicans attempts to undermine and drive the Average American into the Poor House.
  4. Stay Informed on the Issues that are Affecting American and re-peat 2 above.  If your Elected Leaders do not know on how you stand on the issues, How will they support your views and Vote on the Issues you Support?
    • When Listening to the Republicans on TV and Radio- Don't let their slick tongues distort the real issues- "Listen and Watch"- while reading between the Lines.
  5. Because of the way Lobbying Activities Work in Washington there needs to be additional safeguards enacted to protect "We the Americans" from the Major Corporations who are gaining- more and more power, and removing the protections that the Average American Depends upon.


ContributorAmount
Koch Industries $1,931,562
Exxon Mobil $1,337,058
Chief Oil & Gas $1,192,361
Chevron Corp $937,964
Marathon Oil $678,290
Valero Energy $636,500
Occidental Petroleum $575,900
Devon Energy $507,250
Williams Companies $491,685
Chesapeake Energy $467,056
ConocoPhillips $462,204
Independent Petroleum Assn of America $459,500
Anadarko Petroleum $443,260
American Gas Assn $386,400
Halliburton Co $314,280
Pilot Corp $290,567
Tesoro Petroleum $277,883
Society of Indep Gasoline Marketers $274,000
Bass Brothers Enterprises $247,465
Petroleum Marketers Assn $243,900
 
For additional ideas on:
  1. Reducing GHG's
  2. Becoming Energy Efficient
  3. Saving $ on Energy Costs
  4. Government Reform
  5. Clean Energy Jobs
Take the Poll on Where the Energy Will Come From for Your Property in the Future:
Feel Free to use the Links Below.
--

Scott's Contracting


Green Me UP-Scotty
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://scottscontracting.wordpress.com

http://twitter.com/StLHandyMan https://www.facebook.com/GreenMeUPScotty

4.07.2011

EPA-A BIG announcement

Friends,

For too long, the fossil fuel industry has had its way on the climate issue--its money has overwhelmed the scientific facts, delaying action on the largest challenge humanity now faces.

Right now, the the Clean Air Act is being threatened, the EPA is under attack, and big polluters are mounting an all-out onslaught that threatens to destroy our lands and scorch our planet.  In short, we are losing ground.

In the face of these challenges, one thing is clear: if we want to win, we will have to come together like we never have before.

That's why we at 350.org and 1Sky have important news to share: starting today, our organizations are officially merging. We'll be called 350.org, and together we'll be smarter, bolder, faster, and more creative than we were before.

Find out more about the NEW 350.org: www.350.org/new
Over the last three years, 350.org and 1Sky have frequently teamed up for U.S. campaigning. Many of you have been with us every step of the way. Together, we've coordinated over 5,000 climate demonstrations in all 50 states. We've helped protect the Clean Air Act and won a campaign to get solar panels back on the White House. We've launched creative projects to get science at the center of the climate debate, trained thousands of new leaders, and built a network of strong local groups.

Despite all of this work, we haven't been winning enough. The truth is that we don't yet have the climate and energy policies our country and the world need. To get them, we'll need to do much, much more to loosen the stranglehold that corporations have over Congress. We'll need to be as strong as possible to take on the fossil fuel companies--and we can be stronger together. That's why we're merging organizations to create a NEW 350.org.

The merged organization will be running an ongoing series of cutting-edge campaigns--online and offline--that can help usher in a new era of climate action:
  • We will directly confront the barriers to climate progress--from Big Coal to the US Chamber of Commerce, from the cabal of corrupt politicians attacking the Clean Air Act to an administration too timid to defend it.
  • We will train, empower, and mobilize a grassroots army of individuals, businesses, organizations, and community leaders pushing for climate solutions in the United States.  
  • We will continue our work globally to build a diverse climate movement all around the world that unites for strategic mobilizations on a scale previously unimagined.
In just a few short months, we've witnessed people power in action. From the Middle East to the Midwest, movements have risen up to overturn tired dogma and challenge entrenched power.

Many of us were inspired by these events. And many of us were surprised. Perhaps we were growing skeptical that people power could still work. Maybe we had forgotten a vital fact about our world: that bold citizens, united around a common mission, can still come together to create major change against enormous odds.

This movement will never have the money of the fossil fuel industry, so we'll have to use a different currency: people power. People power means you. It means your friends and neighbors. It means hundreds of thousands of us across the country, uniting to transform our future.

We can do it, and we'll need your help--that's why we'll be in close touch in the coming weeks and months about exactly how anyone and everyone can plug into this vital mission.

If the events of 2011 have taught us anything, it's that people, properly organized, can do amazing things together.

On behalf of everyone at the new 350.org, let us be the first to say: we can't wait to do amazing things with all of you.

Onwards,

May Boeve - Executive Director of the NEW 350.org
Liz Butler - Campaign Director, 1Sky
Bill McKibben - Board Chair at 350.org
Betsy Taylor - Board Chair at 1Sky
Build the movement in your community: Join the Climate Network.

How do I donate? Fund the movement to help make bold climate action a reality.

Join our network: Facebook Twitter Myspace YouTube




--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://scottscontracting.wordpress.com

2.25.2011

Global Warming ie: Climate Change is Science the GOP can’t wish away

Many months ago I posted -EPA denies climate change challenges- that the Climate Scientist Reported: stolen emails undermined the Climate Change Reports.

So I thought it was especially appropriate to include the following email I received from the Alliance to Save Energy-News You Can Use-via New York Times

Before you read the article I have to put my two cents in as I don't feel it takes a report from Climate Scientist to tell me that warmer temperatures are affecting the World.  I use my personal experiences instead and the Climate Scientist's can vouch for my observations.
  • I can remember when I was young growing up on the Family Cattle Ranch in North Missouri.  The Winters were long and the Snow Drifts were Huge- (way over my head creating perfect opportunities for Snow Forts and Tunnels in the Back Yard).  
  • It seems that the Bad Weather Started in November and Lasted until the month of March (4 months of Brutal Weather).
  • Since the early to mid 80's I do not feel we have had extended periods of cold temperatures that keep the snow that falls from thawing out.  
  • It seems to me that: the percipitation we now get in our area has more Ice with less Snow and seems to melt within weeks- now seems faster melting times than ever.
  • We now know the major cause of the warmed temperatures: Global Warming ie: Climate Change caused by "Exhaust Gases or GHG's Emissions" from using Fossil Fuels from Coal and Oil
So I asked myself- "Why don't the Governments and Politicians of the World act to reduce these GHG Emissions?" I can't speak for the other countries in the World, but I will point out some facts I have been preaching now for months.


The Rich and Powerful Fossil Fuel Industry supports Politicians both Democrat and Republican.  All of which keep the Politicians in-line and in the Pockets of the Coal and Oil Industries- though Donations for Re-Elections, Pet Projects, etc. Read and Research for yourself at: Dirty Energy Money http://dirtyenergymoney.com/view.php?type=congress

 Global Warming and Climate Change is Science the GOP can’t wish away-  Step away from the Monetary Feed Trough filled by Big Oil and Big Coal  

The National Academy reports concluded that "scientific evidence that the Earth is warming is now overwhelming." Party affiliation does not change that fact. Link Here-http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com/2010/11/all-republicans-in-office-take-heed.html


Now on with the Article via the New York Times- Emphasis Added by Scotty
Scientists Are Cleared Of Misuse Of Data

Feb 25, 2011

by: LESLIE KAUFMAN

An inquiry by a federal watchdog agency found no evidence that scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration manipulated climate data to buttress the evidence in support of global warming, officials said on Thursday.

The inquiry, by the Commerce Department’s inspector general, focused on e-mail messages between climate scientists that were stolen and circulated on the Internet in late 2009 (NOAA is part of the Commerce Department). Some of the e-mails involved scientists from NOAA.

Climate change skeptics contended that the correspondence showed that scientists were manipulating or withholding information to advance the theory that the earth is warming as a result of human activity.

In a report dated Feb. 18 and circulated by the Obama administration on Thursday, the inspector general said, “We did not find any evidence that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data.”

Nor did the report fault Jane Lubchenco, NOAA’s top official, for testifying to Congress that the correspondence did not undermine climate science.

The finding comes at a critical moment for NOAA as some newly empowered Republican House members (see prior post here) seek to rein in the EPA- Environmental Protection Agency’s plans to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, often contending that the science underpinning global warming is flawed. NOAA is the federal agency tasked with monitoring climate data.

The inquiry into NOAA’s conduct was requested last May by Senator James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, who has challenged the science underlying human-induced climate change. Mr. Inhofe was acting in response to the controversy over the e-mail messages, which were stolen from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England, a major hub of climate research.

Mr. Inhofe asked the inspector general of the Commerce Department to investigate how NOAA scientists responded internally to the leaked e-mails. Of 1,073 messages, 289 were exchanges with NOAA scientists.

The inspector general reviewed the 1,073 e-mails, and interviewed Dr. Lubchenco and staff members about their exchanges. The report did not find scientific misconduct; it did however, challenge the agency over its handling of some Freedom of Information Act requests in 2007. And it noted the inappropriateness of e-mailing a collage cartoon depicting Senator Inhofe and five other climate skeptics marooned on a melting iceberg that passed between two NOAA scientists.

The report was not a review of the climate data itself. It joins a series of investigations by the British House of Commons, Pennsylvania State University, the InterAcademy Council and the National Research Council into the leaked e-mails that have exonerated the scientists involved of scientific wrongdoing.

NOAA welcomed the report, saying that it emphasized the soundness of its scientific procedures and the peer review process. “None of the investigations have found any evidence to question the ethics of our scientists or raise doubts about NOAA’s understanding of climate change science,” Mary Glackin, the agency’s deputy undersecretary for operations, said in a statement.

But Mr. Inhofe said the report was far from a clean bill of health for the agency and that contrary to its executive summary, showed that the scientists “engaged in data manipulation.”

“It also appears that one senior NOAA employee possibly thwarted the release of important federal scientific information for the public to assess and analyze,” he said, referring to an employee’s failure to provide material related to work for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a different body that compiles research, in response to a Freedom of Information request.

                                          __________________

Don't let the GOP pull the Wool over your Eyes on the Climate Change Issue-Scotty
__________________

So If you are as sick as I am of the Denial and the GOPs inaction to curtail GHG Emissions.  I encourage everyone to contact your Elected Leaders and tell them: Act to Save Our Planet from Global Warming ie: Climate Change caused mainly by the Exhaust Gases from Fossil Fuels.  For your Convenience You can find your Elected Leaders Information at:

-Find Your Representatives-Republican or Democrat, and Let Your Voice BE HEARD! Active Participation is Suggested #VOTE

Need I mention again that Clean Energy Production will also create JOBS? and Lessen the Demand the US has on Imports of Oil from the Middle East?  It really pisses me off to think about all the prior Service Men and Women who have given so much to protect our Nation from the Damage created from the consumption of OIL, especially from Nations that oppose the Freedoms the USA is best know for.  We can lessen this demand and create Clean Energy Jobs for the USA. 

2.23.2011

MO Senator Roy Blunt on the EPA

Note: I do not support Senator Roy Blunt.  I provided his latest email to me because I think my Fellow Missourian's deserve to know how he stands on the Environmental Issues Facing our State and Nation. Besides his stand with the Big Oil and Big Coal Industry with his fellow Republicans. 

I believe and the facts from his previous Lobbying / Lobbyist Activities not to mention the Earmarks he supported creates conflicts of Interest-Scotty" 



Prior St Louis Renewable Energy Blog Posts in re to Roy Blunt:

Earmarks Data from Open Secrets (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/otherdata.php?cid=N00005195&cycle=2010)

Roy Blunt sponsored or co-sponsored 22 earmarks totaling $22,602,000 in fiscal year 2010, ranking 188th out of 435 representatives. See details. To learn more about earmarks, visit our Earmarks section.



On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Senator Roy Blunt wrote:
 
 
Dear Scotts Contracting:
 
Thank you for your email on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) regulation of greenhouse gases. 
The EPA's efforts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions are outside of the authority given to it by Congress.  It stretches the Clean Air Act to include emissions that the authors of the act never intended to regulate, and I will work to prevent the rule from being implemented and further harming our fragile economy. 
I am co-sponsoring the Defending America's Affordable Energy and Jobs Act (S. 228).  This bill restores Congress' role in the development and implementation of our nation's climate and energy policy by blocking backdoor attempts by regulatory agencies to regulate carbon emissions.
Environmental regulations, while important, should not place undue burdens on Missourians and all Americans, who depend on economically-priced energy on the job and at home.  Protecting our environment and jumpstarting our economy are not mutually exclusive goals. 
We can create better paying jobs at home by developing more American energy, relying on clean fuel alternatives, and promoting conservation.  I continue to support more reliance on alternative fuels and greater investment in research for our energy future. 
Again, thank you for contacting me.  I look forward to continuing our conversation on Facebook (www.facebook.com/SenatorBlunt) and Twitter (www.twitter.com/RoyBlunt) about the important issues facing Missouri and the country.  I also encourage you to visit my website (www.blunt.senate.gov) to learn more about where I stand on the issues and sign-up for my e-newsletter.

Sincere regards,

Roy Blunt
United States Senator

______________________________
Use the Following Link to -Find Your Elected Representatives-Republican or Democrat, and Let Your Voice BE HEARD! Active Participation is Suggested TellMyPolitician  
If your Elected Leaders do not know where you stand on the issues they will not be able to vote for the issues that are affecting: You, Your Family, Work, Health, and Educational Needs.   



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://scottscontracting.wordpress.com

2.20.2011

Republicans Ax the Budget $61 Million

The Proposed cuts sound good in theory while actually doing more harm than good. (Using Simple Math anyone can see)

Did the proposed cuts enacted by the House in the wee hours make any one else sick?  If your are not sick yet your Health may soon suffer. 

The newly elected Tea Party Republican Representatives lead the charge in Hand-Cuffing the EPA and their Pollution Control Measures.  The actions sound good in theory, but actually will create more harm than actual help.
   
Coal and Oil Industry backing- the House Republicans cut the only Regulating Agency the Fossil Fuel Industries are forced to conform to- The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency).
  • The Republicans Claim: "The People have Spoken" "we are acting in their best interest."
 Who are they kidding?  Here are Dirty Coal Figures that contradict the proposed cuts and show the proposed cuts only benefit the Fossil Fuel Industry and Contribute the Harmful GHG Emissions that are causing- Climate Change and Global Warming.
  • coal's costs in environmental and public health damage would triple the cost of coal-generated electricity ...best estimates of costs from coal's annual air pollution at $188 billion and costs from its contributions to global warming at $62 billion ($250 Billion Dollars Combined) (quote) 
Using Simple Math anyone can see: 
  • $61 Billion Cut from Budget - $250 billion Coal Pollution Costs =  nets a negative-$189 Billion in Pollution Costs from Coal.
The Proposed cuts sound good in theory while actually doing more harm than good.  With Leadership like this it is no wonder why the US Budget is out of control.  When enacted programs net a negative numbers.  Who in their correct mind frame would continue to enact programs that do more harm than good?  Its not hard to figure out that steps should be made to correct the Actions to create a 
positive cash flow.

There are better ways to Balance an "Out of Control" Federal Spending Budget.

I suggest that future budget cuts should be made starting with the Politicians Salaries.

It seem that they want the Constituents to live on less-They should "Lead by Example" and cut their Salaries.

I think turn-a-round is fair play - Ax and Cut the Elected Leaders Salaries.  The majority of them are responsible for the mess we are in now anyway. Scotty 2/20/11
__________________
-Find Your Representatives-Republican or Democrat, and Let Your Voice BE HEARD! Active Participation is Suggested TellMyPolitician

I used to link and contacted: McCaskill, Carnahan, and Blunt- the elected officials for my area. 
___________________
House passes sweeping cuts to domestic programs
(AP) – 2/19/11WASHINGTON —
{emphasis added by Scotty}
Jolted to action by deficit-conscious newcomers, the Republican-controlled House passed sweeping legislation early Saturday to cut $61 billion
  • from hundreds of federal programs and 
  • shelter coal companies
  • oil refiners and 
  • farmers from new government regulations.

The 235-189 vote to send the bill to the Senate was largely along party lines and defied a veto threat from President Barack Obama. It marked the most striking victory to date for the 87-member class of freshmen Republicans elected last fall on a promise to attack the deficit and reduce the reach of government. Three Republicans joined Democrats in opposing the measure.

"The American people have spoken. They demand that Washington stop its out-of-control spending now, not some time in the future," declared freshman Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan.

The $1.2 trillion bill covers every Cabinet agency through the Sept. 30 end of the budget year, imposing severe spending cuts aimed at domestic programs and foreign aid, including aid for schools, nutrition programs, environmental protection, and heating and housing subsidies for the poor.

The measure faces a rough ride in the Democratic-controlled Senate, even before the GOP amendments adopted Thursday, Friday and early Saturday morning pushed the bill further and further to the right on health care and environmental policy. Senate Democrats promise higher spending levels and are poised to defend Obama's health care bill, environmental policies and new efforts to overhaul regulation of the financial services industry.

Changes rammed through the House on Friday and Saturday would shield greenhouse-gas polluters and privately owned colleges from federal regulators, block a plan to clean up the Chesapeake Bay, and bar the government from shutting down mountaintop mines it believes will cause too much water pollution, siding with business groups over environmental activists and federal regulators in almost every instance.

"This is like a Cliff Notes summary of every issue that the Republicans, the Chamber of Commerce, and the (free market) CATO Institute have pushed for 30 years," said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass. "And they're just going to run them through here."

The gulf between the combatants ensures that difference on the measure won't be resolved soon, requiring a temporary spending bill when a current stopgap measure expires March 4. Senate Democrats and House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, are already maneuvering for political advantage in anticipation of talks on a short-term extension that will be needed.

Democrats say Boehner's insistence that any stopgap measure carry spending cuts amounts to an ultimatum that could threaten a government shutdown like the episodes that played to the advantage of former President Bill Clinton in his battles with Republicans in 1995-1996.

The Obama administration upped the ante on Friday, warning that workers who distribute Social Security benefits might be furloughed if the GOP cuts go through.
Across four long days of freewheeling debate, Republicans left their conservative stamp in other ways.

They took several swipes at the year-old health care law, including voting for a ban on federal funding for its implementation. At the behest of anti-abortion lawmakers, they called for an end to federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

Republicans awarded the Pentagon an increase of less than 2 percent increase, but domestic agencies would bear slashing cuts of about 12 percent. Such reductions would feel almost twice as deep since they would be spread over the final seven months of the budget year.

Republicans recoiled, however, from some of the most politically difficult cuts to grants to local police and fire departments, special education and economic development. Amtrak supporters easily repelled an attempt to slash its budget.

About the only victory scored by Obama during the week came on a vote Wednesday to cancel $450 million for a costly alternative engine for the Pentagon's next-generation F-35 warplane. It was a top priority of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and passed with the votes of many GOP conservatives who opposed the $3 billion program, more than half of the 87 Republican freshmen elected last fall on promises to cut the budget.

Democrats overwhelmingly oppose the measure and Obama has threatened a veto if it reaches his desk, citing sweeping cuts that he says would endanger the economic recovery.
"The bill will destroy 800,000 American jobs," said House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., citing a study by the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute. "It will increase class sizes and take teachers out of the classrooms ... It will jeopardize homeless veterans, make our communities less secure, threaten America's innovation."

The Environmental Protection Agency was singled out by Republicans eager to defend business and industry from numerous agency regulations they say threaten job-creation and the economy. The EPA's budget was slashed by almost one-third, and then its regulatory powers were handcuffed in a series of floor votes.

Proposed federal regulations would be blocked on emission of greenhouse gases, blamed for climate change, and a proposed regulation on mercury emissions from cement kilns would also be stopped. Additionally, the bill also calls for a halt to proposed regulations affecting Internet service providers and privately-owned colleges, victories for the industries that would be affected.

The 359-page bill was shaped beginning to end by the first-term Republicans, many of them elected with tea party backing.

They rejected an initial draft advanced by the leadership and produced by Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky., chairman of the Appropriations Committee, saying it did not cut deeply enough.

The revised bill added more reductions, and cut $100 billion from Obama's request for the current year, the amount Republicans had cited in their campaign-season Pledge to America.

But a tea party-backed amendment to slash $22 billion on top of the $60-billion-plus worth of steep cuts already made by the measure failed on Friday almost 2-1.

The heavily subsidized ethanol industry absorbed a pair of defeats Saturday at the hands of it many critics, including Rep. John Sullivan, R-Ohio, who won a vote to block the EPA from approving boosting the amount of ethanol in most gasoline to 15 percent.

On other regulatory issues, foes of the EPA won a 249-176 vote to block the agency from using its regulatory powers to curb greenhouse gases. EPA has already taken steps to regulate global warming pollution from vehicles and the largest factories and industrial plants and is expected to soon roll out rules that target refineries and power plants.

The move to stop the EPA from regulating greenhouse-gas polluters came from Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, who said his congressional district is home to more oil refineries than any other.

"We're in the midst of a massive economic downturn and the last thing we need to do is shoot ourselves in the foot with unnecessary, expensive new regulations that are on business and industry," he said.

Republicans also prevailed in more parochial issues, with Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., winning a close vote to block the government from removing hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River, while Robert Goodlatte, R-Va., won a 230-195 vote to block an EPA plan for cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay that would cut pollution from runoff from farms and municipalities throughout the Chesapeake watershed.

And Florida agricultural interests won a vote to block EPA rules issued last year aimed at controlling fertilizer and other pollutants that stoke the spread of algae in the state's waters.
On Thursday, the House voted to block regulations governing the emission of mercury from cement plants and to stop the Federal Communications Commission from enforcing proposed regulations opposed by Verizon and other large Internet Service Providers.

Connect with Scotts Contracting

FB FB Twitter LinkedIn Blog Blog Blog Blog Pinterest