ET Williams

The Doctor of Common Sense

Climate Change

by

Billionaire From Patagonia Who Got Rich From Capitalism Says Capitalist System Is Destroying the Planet

Share

The man who became a billionaire selling sporting equipment and athletic clothing claims that the system that made him rich is “destroying the planet” and that those who deny climate change — including President Donald Trump — are “evil.”

Yvon Chouinard started his business after deciding to make his own equipment for mountain climbing and eventually Patagonia was born.

The high-end company has made him rich, but Chouinard has also always been an environmental activist and now a climate change zealot. 

In an interview with the Guardian, Chouinard, who lives in California, expressed his contempt for capitalism and his disdain for climate change “deniers.”

“In his bridge-club cords and grandpa shoes, 80-year-old Yvon Chouinard doesn’t look the rock-star entrepreneur,” the Guardian reported. “And, when he speaks, he doesn’t sound much like one either. The founder of U.S. outdoor apparel brand Patagonia believes stock market valuations are ‘absurd.’ investing in shares is ‘buying blue sky’ – and modern-day capitalism is destroying the planet.

“I’d like to see an end to public corporations because we’re not going to revolutionize them, we’re not going to change them,” Chouinard said.

And Chouinard remains a hardcore activist, even while some of his contrary moves turned out to make him even wealthier.

His anti-corporate beliefs have kept his company private — he is still the sole owner of Patagonia.

And in an attempt to put a damper on Black Friday shopping, Chouinard started a “Don’t Buy This Shirt” campaign.

“I absolutely don’t believe in doing … focus groups and all that shit,” Chouinard said. “Proctor and Gamble-style, no risk. Just do it.”

“On that occasion, the risk paid off: Patagonia gained 600,000 new customers and year-on-year sales quadrupled,” the Guardian reported.

Chouinard is also no fan of Trump, calling his administration “evil” for its stand on climate change and efforts to return control of some federal lands to the states.

After Trump and the GOP passed tax-cutting legislation, Patagonia announced it would give away any money saved to environmental causes.

Chouinard also plans to put money into “pro-conservation” candidates in upcoming election cycles.

“We simply can’t pussyfoot around anymore,” Chouinard said. “We have to just say, you know, this administration is evil and anybody who is denying climate change is evil.”

Patagonia also joined a lawsuit that is fighting Trump’s reduction of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments to give control of some of the millions of acres back to the state of Utah. And the state is on Trump’s side.

High Country News reported in October 2018:

Earlier this year, Utah tried unsuccessfully to have the pending cases moved from the D.C. court to a district court in the state; now, it wants to join the lawsuits as a defendant. “The State has substantial interests, including sovereign interests, in the management of millions of acres of public land within its borders,” state lawyers say in the filings. They contend that if plaintiffs win their lawsuits and the original monument areas are upheld, that could “deprive the State of revenue and jeopardize the full use of the property rights it holds for the benefit of all Utahns.”

And despite his outspoken stance on capitalism and environmentalism, he has advice for other entrepreneurs:

“Invent your own game and that way you can always be a winner,” Chouinard said.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/12/patagonia-founder-claims-capitalist-system-made-him-wealthy-destroying-planet/

by

Liberal Idiots Reveal New Green Climate Deal And It Will Ban Cars And Plane

Share

 

You can’t fix stupid

 

 (D-N.Y.) on Thursday introduced a new climate change resolution with aims to bring the progressive Green New Deal to life legislatively and push the U.S. to take a lead role in reducing carbon emissions through the economy.

The proposal, titled “Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal,” has a goal of creating millions of “good, high-wage jobs” by striving for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) is introducing a companion proposal in the upper chamber.

The legislation offers a natural transition for Ocasio-Cortez, who before even formally entering office championed the idea of a Green New Deal as the basis for creating a special committee on climate change.

Engaging in a sit-in at Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) office with members of the youth climate advocates the Sunrise Movement, Ocasio-Cortez pushed to make climate change a main focus of the Democratic Party as they took back control of the House.

Her proposed special committee was ultimately rejected by Democratic leaders, who opted instead for a panel on climate crisis that lacks legislative and subpoena power. Pelosi Thursday announced the names of eight members of Congress who will sit on that panel. Ocasio-Cortez is not one of them.

The resolution aims to continue the tenants of that committee, priming congressional leaders to accept the dire climate situation as laid out in this November’s United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report that the world has 12 years to reverse emissions trends in order to thwart irreversible global warming.

“Whereas, because the United States has historically been responsible for a disproportionate amount of greenhouse gas emissions, having emitted 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions through 2014, and has a high technological capacity, the United States must take a leading role in reducing emissions through economic transformation,” the resolution reads.

The proposal says that accomplishing the plan would take a 10 year “national mobilization” and would include resilience building, a 100 percent renewable-energy driven power grid, updating “smart” power grids and increasing building energy efficiency. Buried in the resolution is also a commitment that all future infrastructure bills would specifically address climate change.

The text also calls for a long wish list for Ocasio-Cortez, including seeking environmental changes not directly related to climate change such as supporting family farming, guaranteeing universal access to clean drinking water and investments in high-speed railroads.

“Even the solutions that we have considered big and bold are nowhere near the scale of the actual problem that climate change presents to us, to our country, to the world,” Ocasio-Cortez said in an interview on NPR on Thursday.

“This is really about providing justice for communities and just transitions for communities. So, really the heart of the Green New Deal is about social justice.”

In a statement released Thursday, Varshini Pakash, founder and executive director of the Sunrise Movement, said, “Young people put the Green New Deal on the national agenda. The historic support for this resolution, especially among 2020 contenders, shows how far the movement has shifted the political conversation.”

The proposal has been met in some instances with scorn from people on the right, who criticize it as a radical pipe dream rather than an achievable climate goal. 

While a number of 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls, from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) to Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), have openly embraced “the concept” of the Green New Deal, they too at times have been reserved in what components of the massive undertaking they are getting behind.

The proposal comes a day after two congressional hearings Wednesday focused on addressing climate change. The hearings in the House Natural Resources and the Energy and Commerce committees were the first on the topic in nine and six years, respectively, and Democratic leadership has vowed to make the issue of curbing greenhouse gas emissions front and center in their new majority.

While many Republicans on the committees said they would try to work with Democrats to find common ground on the issue, at least one lawmaker, Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), called the proposal “radical.”

“We should be open to the fact that wealth transfer schemes suggested in the radical policies like the Green New Deal may not be the best path to community prosperity and preparedness,” Shimkus said.

According to The Washington Post, Gillibrand and Booker will sponsor the plan along with other 2020 hopefuls Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is also considering a run for the White House, will also back the plan.  

Co-sponsors of the bill in the House include Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.).

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/428902-ocasio-cortez-unveils-green-new-deal-climate-bill

 

 

by

So-Called Scientist Admit To Making A Mistake On Global Warming Study

Share

Was He Right?

 

 

 

  • Scientists behind a headline-grabbing climate study admitted they “really muffed” their paper.
  • Their study claimed to find 60 percent more warming in the oceans, but that was based on math errors.
  • The errors were initially spotted by scientist Nic Lewis, who called them “serious (but surely inadvertent) errors.”

The scientists behind a headline-grabbing global warming study did something that seems all too rare these days — they admitted to making mistakes and thanked the researcher, a global warming skeptic, who pointed them out.

“When we were confronted with his insight it became immediately clear there was an issue there,” study co-author Ralph Keeling told The San Diego Union-Tribune on Tuesday.

 

 

Their study, published in October, used a new method of measuring ocean heat uptake and found the oceans had absorbed 60 more heat than previously thought. Many news outlets relayed the findings, but independent scientist Nic Lewis quickly found problems with the study.

Keeling, a scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, owned up to the mistake and thanked Lewis for finding it. Keeling and his co-authors submitted a correction to the journal Nature. (RELATED: Headline-Grabbing Global Warming Study Suffers From A Major Math Error)

“We’re grateful to have it be pointed out quickly so that we could correct it quickly,” Keeling said.

In a statement posted online Friday, Keeling said “the combined effect of these two corrections to have a small impact on our calculations of overall heat uptake.” However, Keeling said the errors mean there are “larger margins of error” than they initially thought.

So, while Keeling said they still found there’s more warming than previously thought, there’s too much uncertainty to support their paper’s central conclusion that oceans absorbed 60 percent more heat than current estimates show.

“Our error margins are too big now to really weigh in on the precise amount of warming that’s going on in the ocean,” Keeling told The Union Tribune. “We really muffed the error margins.”

Keeling and his co-authors used the study to debut a new way of estimating ocean heat uptake by measuring the volume of carbon dioxide and oxygen in the atmosphere. Scientists are still intrigued by this method, but all the kinks need to be worked out.

“So far as I can see, their method vastly underestimates the uncertainty,” Lewis told The Washington Post in an interview Tuesday, “as well as biasing up significantly, nearly 30 percent, the central estimate.”

Lewis pointed out the errors in Keeling’s study in a blog post published Nov. 6 on climate scientist Judith Curry’s website. Lewis wrote that “[j]ust a few hours of analysis and calculations … was sufficient to uncover apparently serious (but surely inadvertent) errors in the underlying calculations.”

Lewis is an ardent critic of climate scientists’ over-reliance on climate models, which he says predict too much warming. Lewis and Curry published a study earlier in 2018 that found climate models overestimated global warming by as much as 45 percent.

Lewis’s corrections were quickly confirmed by University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke Jr. Pielke called Keeling’s acceptance and willingness to correct the mistakes a “lesson in graciousness.”

Roger Pielke Jr.

✔@RogerPielkeJr

Resplandy et al follow up
Ralph Keeling of Scripps lesson in graciousness:
“When we were confronted with his insight it became immediately clear there was an issue there. We’re grateful to have it be pointed out quickly so that we could correct it quickly” https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/environment/sd-me-climate-study-error-20181113-story.html …

92

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Climate skeptic uncovers scientific error, upends major ocean warming study

Scientists with UC San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography and Princeton University recently walked back a claim made last month that oceans had been heating up dramatically faster than the…

sandiegouniontribune.com

53 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

“Unfortunately, we made mistakes here,” Keeling told WaPo. “I think the main lesson is that you work as fast as you can to fix mistakes when you find them.”

 

https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/14/scientists-mistakes-global-warming/

by

Idiot Dartmouth Prof. Says ‘If we don’t abolish capitalism, capitalism will abolish us’ (Save The Earth)

Share

A tough guy at college only. Why don’t he move to a socialist country?

 

 


Dartmouth College lecturer Mark Bray made the argument to abolish capitalism in a recent op-ed for Truthout, linking capitalism to the prioritizing of profit over the environment and everything else.
The professor has previously donated half of the profits from his book chronicling Antifa to the organization, written an introduction to an Antifa comic book, and tweeted glowingly about Antifa flags made by kids at a summer camp.

A Dartmouth professor argued on Tuesday that “if we don’t abolish capitalism, capitalism will abolish us.”
Dartmouth College lecturer Mark Bray made the remark in an op-ed for Truthout, titled “How Capitalism Stokes the Far Right and Climate Catastrophe.”
“We must recognize that the climate crisis and the resurgence of the far right are two of the most acute symptoms of our failure to abolish capitalism.”    Tweet This

“We are on a deadline,” Bray says. “Lesser-evilism among capitalist politicians may have some rationale when spending five minutes casting a ballot on Election Day, but we don’t have time for it to be a guiding strategical outlook. We need to organize movements to build popular power and shut down the industries that threaten our existence.”
“Fascism is ascendant,” the Ivy League professor continues. “The world is on fire. This is no time to be patient. If we don’t abolish capitalism, capitalism will abolish us.”
Bray claims that the far right advocates for environmentally destructive policies, alleging that the faction prioritizes interests of certain groups over those of the entire planet, but takes his argument a step further by blaming capitalism.
“We must recognize that the climate crisis and the resurgence of the far right are two of the most acute symptoms of our failure to abolish capitalism,” the scholar asserts. “A capitalist system that prioritizes profit and perpetual growth over all else is the mortal enemy of global aspirations for a sustainable economy that satisfies needs rather than stock portfolios.”
Bray’s faculty profile lists the Dartmouth lecturer as an associated visiting scholar of the school’s Gender Research Institute. It also describes him as “a historian of human rights, terrorism, and political radicalism in Modern Europe.” But Bray seems to have done more than just document issues of radicalism.
The professor donated half of the profits from his book “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook” to Antifa.
[RELATED: Dartmouth prof to donate half of book proceeds to Antifa]
He has also authored the introduction to an Antifa comic book and in a tweet displaying photos of what he suggested were Antifa flags made by kids at a summer camp, said “super rad!”
Campus Reform contacted Bray, asking him what his preferred alternative to capitalism would be among other questions, but the professor did not comment in time for press.

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11470

by

Insane Tree Hugging Un-Godly UN Wants Gas To Be $240 Gal To Fight Global Warming

Share

Al Gore Should Be Arrested For Making Millions Off The Fake Man Mad Global Warming.

 

 

 

A $240 PER GALLON GAS TAX TO FIGHT GLOBAL WARMING? NEW UN REPORT SUGGESTS CARBON PRICING

  • A new U.N. report suggests a $240 per gallon gas tax equivalent is needed to fight global warming.
  • The U.N. says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton in the year 2100.
  • If you think that’s unlikely to ever happen, you’re probably right.

A United Nations special climate report suggests a tax on carbon dioxide emissions would need to be as high as $27,000 per ton at the end of the century to effectively limit global warming.

 

Tree Hugging Idiot.

 

 

For Americans, that’s the same as a $240 per gallon tax on gasoline in the year 2100, should such a recommendation be adopted. In 2030, the report says a carbon tax would need to be as high as $5,500 — that’s equivalent to a $49 per gallon gas tax.

 

Political Correctness Gone Amuck.

 

 

 

If you think that’s an unlikely scenario, you’re probably not wrong. However, it’s what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s report, released Sunday night, sees as a policy option for reducing emissions enough to keep projected warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

 

Nuff Said!

 

 

 

 

The IPCC’s report is meant to galvanize political support for doubling down on the Paris climate accord ahead of a U.N. climate summit scheduled for December. The report calls for societal changes that are “unprecedented in terms of scale” in order to limit future global warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the stretch goal of the Paris accord.

However, the costs of meeting that goal are high based on the IPCC’s own figures. (RELATED: Here’s What The Media Won’t Tell You About The U.N.’s New Climate Report)

In order to effectively keep future warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the IPCC says carbon taxes would need to range from $135 to $5,500 per ton in 2030, $245 to $13,000 per ton in 2050, $420 to $17,000 per ton in 2070 and $690 to $27,000 per ton in 2100.

To meet the goals of the Paris accord, which seeks to limit future warming to below 2 degrees Celsius, the IPCC says carbon taxes would have range between $10 and $200 in 2030 and $160 and $2,125 in 2100.

That’s equivalent to a gas tax as high as $1.70 per gallon in 2030 to nearly $19 per gallon at the end of the century. That’s less onerous than limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, but still no walk in the park.

California and many European countries have policies to price carbon dioxide emissions and mandate green energy, including cap-and-trade systems and carbon taxes. But carbon prices under those systems are nowhere near where the IPCC says they need to be.

The IPCC said the “price of carbon would need to increase significantly when a higher level of stringency is pursued.” However, the group’s report tacitly acknowledges the unlikelihood that governments will enact astronomical taxes on energy.

“While the price of carbon is central to prompt mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5 [degree Celsius]-consistent pathways, a complementary mix of stringent policies is required,” reads the IPCC’s report.

In the U.S., Republican lawmakers overwhelmingly passed a resolution opposed to carbon taxes in July. Democrats called for a price on carbon dioxide in their 2016 party platform, but they haven’t made much effort on that front since the failure of cap-and-trade legislation in 2010.

Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo of Florida introduced carbon tax legislation shortly after all but five of his GOP colleagues in the House voted to oppose such a bill. Curbelo’s bill would tax carbon dioxide at $23 a ton — nowhere near what the IPCC calls for.

However, the IPCC suggested a lower carbon tax could be used in conjunction with command and control policies, like regulations and bans on coal plants, could achieve “generate a 1.5˚C pathway for the U.S. electric sector.”

But that point only serves to undermine Curbelo’s bill, which would put a moratorium on some environmental regulations and possibly eliminate some if emissions goals are reached.

The IPCC noted the “literature indicates that the pricing of emissions is relevant but needs to be complemented with other policies to drive the required changes in line with 1.5°C-consistent cost-effective pathways.”

 

http://dailycaller.com/2018/10/08/a-240-per-gallon-gas-tax-to-fight-global-warming-new-un-report-suggests-carbon-pricing/

by

California Liberals Wasting $40,000 A Mile Paint The Street To Fight Climate Change

Share

Idiots wasting taxpayer money on fake Climate Change.

Los Angeles officials are going forward with a $40,000-a-mile program to coat public streets to fight climate change, despite the city’s many financial challenges — including a $73 million budget shortfall for dealing with the ever-expanding homeless population.

The program uses a light-colored sealant to cover the streets, which decreases the pavement temperature of so-called “heat-islands,” according to media reports.

Fox News reported (original links):

The LA Street Services began rolling out the project last May, which preliminary testing shows has reduced the temperature of roadways by up to 10 degrees.

The project involves applying a light gray coating of the product CoolSeal, made by the company GuardTop.

Caleb Jordan Schulz@Based_Jedi

$40,000/mile to paint roads white.
California is insane.http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/04/10/los-angeles-painting-city-streets-white-in-bid-to-combat-climate-change.amp.html?__twitter_impression=true …

Los Angeles painting city streets white in bid to combat climate change

California officials are hoping their latest attempt to stem the rising tides of climate change leads to a more socially conscious — and cooler — summer.

foxnews.com

Twitter Ads info and privacy

“CoolSeal is applied like conventional sealcoats to asphalt surfaces to protect and maintain the quality and longevity of the surface,” according to the company website. “While most cool pavements on the market are polymer based, CoolSeal is a water-based, asphalt emulsion.”

advertisement

Last year, the L.A. Daily Newsreported on the high cost of the project — and that local officials approved it nonetheless.

The morning temperature of the black asphalt in the middle of a nearby intersection read 93 degrees. The new light gray surface on Jordan Avenue read a cool 70 — on what would turn out to be the first heat wave of the year.

“It’s awesome. It’s very cool — both literally and figuratively,” exclaimed Councilman Bob Blumenfield, whose Los Angeles district includes Canoga Park, squinting into the laser handheld thermometer. “We are trying to control ‘the heat island effect’ ” — or hotter temperatures caused by urban sprawl.

“The downside: we won’t be able to fry eggs on the streets,” Blumenfield said.

Andy Oz@AndyOz2

$40,000 per mile of wasted taxpayers money. Peak in while California have millions of homeless.http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/04/10/los-angeles-painting-city-streets-white-in-bid-to-combat-climate-change.html …

Los Angeles painting city streets white in bid to combat climate change

California officials are hoping their latest attempt to stem the rising tides of climate change leads to a more socially conscious — and cooler — summer.

foxnews.com

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, who is eyeing a run for the White House in 2020, has embraced the program “as part of an overall plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the city by 45 percent below 1990 levels by 2025,” according to Fox News.

And environmental activists are praising L.A.’s street-sealing project.

“Advocates are confident that advances in asphalt technology will drive down the cost,” Mother Nature Network reported on Sunday.

“There’s also the related economic benefits to consider: in once-sweltering neighborhoods where streets are now painted white, residents will be less likely to crank the air conditioning on full blast, leading to significant savings on energy bills and decreased emissions,” the website reported.

“What’s more, the highly reflective nature of white-coated asphalt means that street lighting doesn’t have to kick in quite as early in the evening, saving additional energy.”

 

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2018/04/17/los-angeles-dishing-40000-mile-street-coating-fight-climate-change/