King of Sweden Wants To Ban Baths To Conserve Energy

TN Note:  King Carl tells the world that he is “ashamed” to run a bath after realizing how much energy they use. This is the height of lunacy in a nation roughly the same size as California, but with over 97,500 lakes larger than 2 acres.

The King of Sweden has called for a ban on baths to help save the environment.

King Carl XVI Gustaf, who once had a reputation as a lothario and is now a staunch environmentalist, said he realised how much water and energy they used when he was recently staying somewhere without a shower.

The 69-year-old ‘green king’ told Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet: ‘It hit me how much water and energy it used.

‘I thought “I can’t believe I’m having to do this”. I felt quite ashamed.’

Apparently in jest, he added: ‘We should ban all baths.’

The Swedish head of state said he now drives an eco-friendly hybrid car, turning around his lifelong reputation as a ‘petrolhead’.

‘When I drive into town, it’s on electricity,’ he said.

Much like the Prince Charles’s overhaul of Highgrove House with ‘eco toilets’, the Swedish king’s residence has been made greener with environmentally-friendly heating and low-energy lightbulbs.

‘We do what we can here at the palace. It’s an ongoing project trying to save energy, but it isn’t easy in an old property,’ he said.

King Carl Gustaf attended the first UN environmental conference in Stockholm and 1972 and is due to attend UN climate change talks in Paris in just over a week.

He said: ‘We have to think that we will do our best. And I think there is a general feeling that we’re going to achieve it.’

Read full article here…

Alberta’s Climate Change Strategy Goes After Carbon, Coal

TN Note: An anti-carbon strategy is suicidal to economic growth because the energy deficit that these policies will create cannot possibly be replaced by all the alternative power schemes in the world. Thus, the bet on a “wing and a prayer” that some unseen/uninvented technology will bail them out before it hits the fan.

Alberta’s climate change strategy includes a tax on carbon, a cap on oilsands emissions, a phasing out of coal-fired electricity and an emphasis on wind power.

“Our goal is to become one of the world’s most progressive and forward-looking energy producers,” said Premier Rachel Notley. “We are turning the page on the mistaken policies of the past, policies that have failed to provide the leadership our province needed.”

But the strategy will not be cheap and will be paid for not only by industry, but by ordinary Albertans.

The province estimates the carbon tax will amount to roughly $470 in increased heating, electricity and transportation costs for an average household in 2018, assuming that household consumes the same amount of fossil fuels as it did in 2015.

There will be, however, consumer rebates to offset some of those increases.

The carbon tax on industry is expected to raise $3 billion a year, which will be reinvested in renewable energy sectors and cover increased costs to consumers.

The province sees the emissions cap as motivation for the oilsands sector to innovate and become more globally competitive.

Greenpeace, industry approve

The plan is endorsed by environmentalists and the oilsands industry.

“On behalf of Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., my colleagues from Suncor, Cenovus and Shell, we applaud Premier Notley for giving us, to provide us the position of leadership on climate policy,” CNRL chairman Murray Edwards said at the news conference.

Steve Williams, CEO of Suncor, shared Edwards’ enthusiasm.

“This plan will make one of the world’s largest oil-producing regions a leader in addressing the climate change challenge,” he said.

While Greenpeace said the measures will help slow Alberta’s growing emissions, diversify its economy and create jobs, they still require emission reduction targets.

“Targets give an important signal to business, let the world know where Alberta is headed, and help ensure that direction leads to the reductions that science and equity demand,” said spokesman Mike Hudema.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) offered cautiously optimistic comments.

“From our industries point of view, there are certainly a lot of details that will need to be filled in on multiple different fronts, but in general we’re quite supportive of the use of natural gas and the phase out of coal,” CAPP president Tim McMillan said.

One of the few dissenting voices came from the opposition Wildrose Party.

Leader Brian Jean said Albertans face job losses and economic uncertainty.

“This new carbon tax will make almost every single Alberta family poorer, while accelerated plans to shut down coal plants will lead to higher power prices and further jobs losses,” he said in a news release.

Read full story here…

Prominent Scientists Rip Climate Change Ahead of UN Summit: ‘Irrational’ – ‘Nonsense’ – ‘False Path’

TN Note: Sorry, Al Gore. Your “science” is a total scam and you know it. There is a major push to discredit this false science at the Paris summit starting on November 30. The United Nations is using global warming as the motivator to stampede world leaders into accepting Sustainable Development. If enough leaders of other countries understand this, they will balk and turn the summit into chaos.

A team of prominent scientists gathered in Texas today at a climate summit to declare that fears of man-made global warming were “irrational” and “based on nonsense” that “had nothing to do with science.” They warned that “we are being led down a false path” by the upcoming UN climate summit in Paris.

The scientists appeared at a climate summit sponsored by the Texas Public Policy Foundation. The summit in Austin was titled: “At the Crossroads: Energy & Climate Policy Summit.”

Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen, an emeritus Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT, derided what he termed climate “catastrophism.”

“Demonization of CO2 is irrational at best and even modest warming is mostly beneficial,” Lindzen said.

Lindzen cautioned: “The most important thing to keep in mind is – when you ask ‘is it warming, is it cooling’, etc.  — is that we are talking about something tiny (temperature changes) and that is the crucial point.”

Lindzen also challenged the oft-repeated UN IPCC claim that most of warming over past 50 years was due to mankind.

“People get excited over this. Is this statement alarming? No,” Lindzen stated.

“We are speaking of small changes 0.25 Celcius would be about 51% of the recent warming and that strongly suggests a low and inconsequential climate sensitivity – meaning no problem at all,” Lindzen explained.

“I urge you when looking at a graph, check the scales! The uncertainty here is tenths of a degree,” he noted.

“When someone points to this and says this is the warmest temperature on record. What are they talking about? It’s just nonsense. This is a very tiny change period. And they are arguing over hundredths of a degree when it is uncertain in tenths of a degree,” Lindzen said.

“And the proof that the uncertainty is tenths of a degree are the adjustments that are being made. If you can adjust temperatures to 2/10ths of a degree, it means it wasn’t certain to 2/10ths of a degree,” he said. (Also See: Scientists balk at ‘hottest year’ claims: Ignores Satellites showing 18 Year ‘Pause’ – ‘We are arguing over the significance of hundredths of a degree’ – The ‘Pause’ continues)

“The UN IPCC wisely avoided making the claim that 51% of a small change in temperature constitutes a problem. They left this to the politicians and anyone who took the bait,” he said.

Lindzen noted that National Academy of Sciences president Dr. Ralph Cicerone has even admitted that there is no evidence for a catastrophic claims of man-made global warming. See: Backing away from climate alarm? NAS Pres. Ralph Cicerone says ‘we don’t have that kind of evidence’ to claim we are ‘going to fry’ from AGW

Lindzen also featured 2006 quotes from Scientist Dr. Miike Hulme, Professor of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia, and Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, admitting that claims of a climate catastrophe were not the “language of science.”

“The discourse of catastrophe is a campaigning device,” Hulme wrote to the BBC in 2006. “The language of catastrophe is not the language of science. To state that climate change will be ‘catastrophic’ hides a cascade of value-laden assumptions which do not emerge from empirical or theoretical science,” Hulme wrote.

“Is any amount of climate change catastrophic? Catastrophic for whom, for where, and by when? What index is being used to measure the catastrophe?” Hulme continued.

Lindzen singled out Secretary of State John Kerry for his ‘ignorance’ on science.

“John Kerry stands alone,” Lindzen said. “Kerry expresses his ignorance of what science is,” he added.

Read full story here…

NOAA Released Climate Report Over Objections From Its Own Scientists

TN Note: Whistleblowers have come forward saying that NOAA fudged their Climate-Change report in order to meet political requirements. However, NOAA has claimed that its paper was “peer reviewed” by the scientific community, which is turning out to be a bald-faced lie. This is not surprising in that NOAA is full of Technocracy-oriented ideologues.

House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) opened another front in his war with federal climate researchers on Wednesday, saying a groundbreaking global warming study was “rushed to publication” over the objections of numerous scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

In a second letter in less than a week to Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, Smith urged her to pressure NOAA to comply with his subpoena for internal communications. Smith says whistleblowers have come forward with new information on the climate study’s path to publication in June.The study refuted claims that global warming had “paused” or slowed over the past decade, undercutting a popular argument used by those who refute the scientific consensus that man-made pollution is behind global warming.

The research, considered a bombshell in the climate change debate, set off alarms among skeptics. Smith, a prominent congressional skeptic, claimed that scientists manipulated data to advance President Obama’s agenda and timed the study’s release to coincide with the administration’s new limits on emissions from coal plants.

He is seeking NOAA’s internal communications and e-mails among its researchers, and in October subpoenaed Administrator Kathryn Sullivan for the documents. But she has refused to turn them over, saying that deliberative communications between scientists should be protected.

Read full report here…

International Islamic Declaration on Climate Change

TN Note: Islam is a green religion with almost 12% of verses in the Koran dealing with the ecology and care for the planet. Thus, it is not surprising to see a statement such as this, calling it “a religious duty to fight climate change.”

The Islamic Climate Declaration released today calls on 1.6 billion Muslims to work towards phasing out fossil fuel use, as a religious duty to fight climate change. It also calls on all leaders and politicians to do their part for a better future for all.

In common with all the Abrahamic faiths, Islam considers mankind to be stewards of resources endowed by Allah. This implies responsible stewardship of these resources. In particular this leads to the avoidance of asraf (abuse) of God-given resources.

In this context Islamic investments and activities have to have a moral and ethical framework. This clearly lays the foundation of protection of the environment as a key requirement.

Given Islam’s emphasis on equality and justice the present order of predatory capture of global ecological capital would be challenged.

Although climate impacts in the UK dwarf those of countries on the front lines, greater heat wave related mortality, flood induced pauperisation and drought are realities for which we will all be preparing.

British Muslims can respond to climate change in a countless number of ways. We would urge caution over public relations-orientated work in this sector, as it is seldom sustainable and recommend genuine grass roots dialogue, creativity and negotiation. Citizens might be moved to become supporters of the community energy agenda and neighbourhood led climate safeguarding activity.

Dr Shuja Shafi, Secretary General of the MCB said, “We are encouraged by the Pope’s recent encyclical on climate justice and look forward to joining hands and hearts with our sisters and brothers in different faiths to explore each other’s ecological traditions and challenge the systems of  inequality that endanger humans and non-humans on our common home.

We are pleased that some of our key affiliates are playing a significant role to raise awareness and are in Istanbul to officially launch the Islamic Declaration on Climate Change.

The MCB believe it is our role as Muslims to be caretakers of the earth and we will be looking to play a supportive role in ensuring that all natural resources are protected and that our future generations continue this legacy”.

Read full story here…

Yawn: Humanity’s future in the balance at UN climate summit

TN Note: The hysterical media buildup to the Paris Climate Change Summit is getting wearisome. I can easily spot 6-10 articles per day in the international press that mimic this headline. Most of them reference Al Gore in some way, shape or form. However, remember that climate change has been declared to be a complete hoax by many leading climatologists around the world. With that in mind, the lie must be repeated furiously and frequently to make it stick regardless of the clear evidence to the contrary.

In two weeks’ time, world leaders gather for a crunch climate summit in terror-hit Paris to determine what kind of future awaits humankind.

Security fears threaten to overshadow the conference to be launched by some 120 heads of state after a coordinated spree of attacks by gunmen and suicide bombers killed 129 people in the French capital.

But US President Barack Obama has stood firm in his resolve to attend the November 30 opening, and France insists it won’t bend a knee to terrorism by postponing the event.

After all, the stakes are high.

Will we succeed in containing greenhouse gas emissions altering Earth’s climate? Or will we overshoot the critical warming level beyond which science says our planet could become inhospitable to humans?

The answer will be determined by what emerges from the November 30-December 11 haggle.

The conference represents the first bid for a truly universal climate rescue pact since the chaotic 2009 summit in Copenhagen ended in bitter disappointment.

Much has changed since then: evidence has accumulated for the planetary perils we face; low-carbon technology has become cheaper and more readily available; and political, business and public pressure for a future powered by renewable energy has gained momentum.

At the same time, the window of opportunity for action has narrowed.

Just last week, Britain’s weather office said Earth has already heated by about 1 C — halfway to the UN target of limiting average global warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-Industrial Revolution levels.

The World Meteorological Organization says greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere hit a new record in 2014.

“We have a dramatic increase in the extreme weather events connected to climate,” former US vice president and Nobel-awarded climate activist Al Gore told AFP last week.

“We’re seeing sea level rise (to) now flood the streets of many cities during high tides. We’re seeing refugee crises that have multiple causes, but we know they are made worse by, for example, the historic climate-related drought in Syria.

Read full story here…

Claims: Climate Change Contributes To Islamic Acts of Terror

TN Note: Apparently, there is nothing bad in the world that cannot be blamed on climate-change. Al Gore recently said that carbon dioxide makes you stupid – a really stupid claim, actually. Most Americans see through these claims as desperate attempts to give the bum’s rush to the Paris Climate Change Summit starting on November 30.

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders used the terrorist attacks in Paris to call for action to address climate change at a primary debate Saturday. But, while the plea attracted ridicule across the political spectrum, many academics and national security experts agree that climate change contributes to an uncertain world where terrorism can thrive.

U.S. military officials refer to climate change as a “threat multiplier” that takes issues like terrorism that would pose a threat to national security and exacerbates the damage they can cause. A 2014 Department of Defensereport identifies climate change as the root of government instability that leads to widespread migration, damages infrastructure and leads to the spread of disease. “These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism,” the report says.

The parallels between the situation described in the government report and the situation on the ground in Syria are striking. The worst drought on record in the Middle Eastern country has created instability for farmers and threatened the food supply. At the same time, the government has struggled to hold on to power across the country in the face of militant groups and millions of Syrians have fled their homeland.

Read full article here…

Gore’s Climate Change Concert Cut Short By Paris Seige

TN Note: Al Gore’s big 24-hour concert production in Paris was cut after only 5 hours of broadcast, due to the coordinated and brutal Paris terrorist attack. Our hearts are with the wounded, families who lost loved ones and others who have been traumatized by this horrendous act in France, but we are not sorry that Al Gore didn’t get to play his fiddle for climate-change.

The 24-hour global broadcast, put on by the Climate Reality Project and Live Earth, began Friday at noon ET and will stretch into Saturday. Just a couple weeks ahead of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s “COP21” conference in Paris, the broadcast makes its base in the same city and is meant to inform and motivate people around the world to speak up and take action to combat climate change.

The fifth annual event is “about making sure the people of the world are informed and engaged so that they can make their voices heard in their capitals and at the negotiating table in Paris,” Al Gore, former vice president of the U.S. and founder and chairman of the Climate Reality Project, is quoted as saying in a press release. “The U.N. climate talks can be a breakthrough moment to change the dangerous course we’ve set for our planet. We want the world’s leaders to know the world is watching, and it’s time for them to act.”

“We’ve come a long way in five years,” Gore said from Paris on Friday, after the animated spot voiced by Freeman ended. He stood on a stage in a sort of clear plastic dome with the Eiffel Tower visible in the background. “People, businesses and leaders everywhere today are realizing that strong action is essential to solve this crisis,” he added. “What we need now is for people all over the world to speak out, to encourage and motivate their leaders to get active in this shift.… That’s what the next 24 hours are all about. Because, truly, today the world is watching.”

Several actors and musicians signed on to be part of the 24-hour lineup, including Duran Duran performing live from Paris, Elton John, Florence + the Machine, Mumford & Sons, Neil Young, Jon Bon Jovi, Walk the Moon, Morgan Freeman, Ryan Reynolds, Calum Worthy and Ian Somerhalder.

Read full story here…

70% of Climate Believers Say Deniers Should Be Prosecuted

TN Note: This is an astonishing survey. If 24% of voters are climate-change believers, and 17% of voters favor punishment of “deniers”, then 70% of the believers are in favor of punishment. This is reminiscent of the Inquisitions during the Dark Ages: either believe the way we believe, or suffer the consequences. Needless to say, this is a very dangerous trajectory.

Global warming advocates are calling for the prosecution of groups who disagree with them, and New York State has taken it a step further by investigating Exxon Mobil for refusing to play ball with the popular scientific theory.

But 68% of Likely U.S. Voters oppose the government investigating and prosecuting scientists and others including major corporations who question global warming. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 17% favor such prosecutions. Fifteen percent (15%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Just over one-in-four Democrats (27%), however, favor prosecuting those who don’t agree with global warming. Only 11% of Republicans and 12% of voters not affiliated with either major party agree.

After all, just 24% of all voters believe the scientific debate about global warming is over, although that’s up from 20% in July of last year. Unchanged is the 63% who say that debate is not done yet. Thirteen percent (13%) are not sure.

Among voters who believe scientists have made up their minds about global warming, one-in-four (24%) favor prosecuting those who question that theory, but 64% are opposed.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on November 9-10, 2015 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Eighty-seven percent (87%) of voters describe their constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech as Very Important.

But only 20% of Americans think they have true freedom of speech today. Seventy-three percent (73%) think instead that Americans have to be careful not to say something politically incorrect to avoid getting in trouble.

Most voters across nearly all demographic categories agree that the scientific debate about global warming is not over.

Most also oppose prosecuting those who don’t agree that global warming is real, although voters under 40 are more supportive of prosecution that their elders are.

Read full story here…

The March To Paris Has Begun

TN Note: President Obama will take credit for any successes stemming from the 2015 Paris summit, thanks to his “leadership”. In fact, 100 percent of his climate-change policy structure was architected by John Podesta, a member of the Trilateral Commission, founder of George Soros-funded Center For American Progress and insider at the United Nations.

Less than one month from now the nations of the world will meet in Paris for the 21st Session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21). During the November 30 to December 11 meeting, organizers hope to reach a new international agreement on the climate—something that has been unachievable at the recent annual events.

President Obama is “cautiously optimistic” that a global climate agreement will finally be reached as a result of his “leadership.” As stated during the October 11 edition of 60 Minutes, he sees his role in Paris as more important than fighting ISIS: “My definition of leadership would be leading on climate change, an international accord that potentially we’ll get in Paris.”

This “accord” will not be an enforceable “treaty” as was The Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change negotiated in 1997 and signed by President Clinton but never ratified by the U.S. Congress. The Kyoto Protocol expired at the end of 2012. Supporters have since been scrambling to reach a new deal. Once again, however, Congress will not ratify any such agreement—leaving the President to “lead by example” through executive and regulatory actions that have little chance of success.

The Clean Power Plan (CPP) is, as stated by NPR, “the centerpiece of President Obama’s broader climate agenda.” NPR continues: “He’s urging other big countries to take similarly aggressive action in advance of an international climate summit in Paris later this year.” The Washington Examiner called CPP “the linchpin in securing a global deal on emission reductions” in Paris.

Addressing the important role of CPP, the director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign, Mary Ann Hitt, declared that it “signals to the rest of the world that the U.S. is serious about combating the climate crisis ahead of international negotiations in Paris.”

In case you haven’t been following the multi-year regulatory process that introduced draft rules in 2014, with finalized rules released in August and, finally, after more than three times the usual lag time, the 2,000-page CPP was published in the Federal Register on October 23.  The diktat, which requires a cut in power-plant carbon emissions of 32% below 2005 levels by 2030, has been called “one of the most far-reaching energy regulations in this nation’s history.”

CPP is loathed by most Republicans, some Democrats, industry associations and business groups, utilities, coal companies, and mining interests. Therefore, less than 12 hours after publication in the Federal Register, it became “the most heavily litigated environmental regulation ever”—with more than 15 separate cases from 26 states and countless industry groups filed against it in just two days. All the lawsuits have been consolidated into one case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. It is widely expected to ultimately be heard before the Supreme Court—which may not hear the case until 2018. By the time a final ruling is made, the Obama Administration believes that, as was the case with the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, industry will have already done so much to comply with the rule that the high court’s decision will be almost irrelevant. The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) states: “Even if CPP is … junked by the courts, they’re hoping to intimidate the states and dictate the U.S. energy mix for a generation.”

It is the lengthy timeline that prompted lawsuits to not only overturn the CPP, but to also ask for a stay of the rule while the court decides on the case—as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit granted last month regarding the Obama Administration’s Waters of the U.S. rule.

Read full story here…