In speaking at George Washington University’s GreenGov symposium last week, McCarthy stated: “If you are selling to somebody a product, and you can assure them that that product was produced in the most environmentally responsible way, I will guarantee you that they will value that product more highly.”
She then added an ominous little, or perhaps not so little, threat: “I can guarantee you because if they don’t, I’m going to knock on their door and I’m going to tell them why they are mistaken.”
Ouch! Well, seeing this lady snarling at your front door would be frightening enough even if she wasn’t from the EPA.
The new ozone regulations mean “it’s going to be tougher and tougher and tougher to produce natural gas, if you can produce it at all,” Dan Kish, senior vice president for policy at IER, told the Daily Caller. “And it’s not just gas, it’s oil too.”
McCarthy admitted that the conversion of power plants from coal-fired to natural gas is a pivotal method states will employ to meet the EPA’s new CO2 standards. “Natural gas has been a game changer with our ability to really move forward with pollution reductions that have been very hard to get our arms around for many decades,” she said.
Meanwhile, the Heritage Foundation released a study last fall that found the EPA regulations the Obama administration has announced in order to achieve its climate change goals would reduce the United States’ Gross Domestic Product by $2.5 trillion by 2030. Further, employment levels would “track nearly 300,000 jobs below the no-carbon-regulation baseline in an average year, with some years seeing an employment deficit of more than 1 million jobs.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that a typical U.S. household could lose about $3400 in disposable income per year, with a combined loss for all households of $586 billion by 2030, due to Obama’s new EPA climate change regulations.
The IER report concludes that the “EPA’s regulations impose huge costs for small benefits. The agency’s ozone rule could be the single costliest regulation in U.S. history…Meanwhile, EPA’s CO2 rule will imposedouble-digit electricity rate hikes for residents of 43 states, but limit global warming by just 0.02 degrees Celsius. The solution is for EPA to withdraw its proposed ozone and CO2 rules.”
Data Show U.S. in 10-Year Cooling Trend
Posted on June 16, 2015 by Philip Hodges
According to recent data compiled by NOAA, the U.S. has actually been in the middle of a slight cooling trend over the last ten years. This information comes on the heels of a study put out by NOAA claiming that there was no global warming pause. They came to this conclusion by conveniently adjusting earlier data downwards and more recent data upwards. So, in reality, they adjusted the data so that it yielded their desired conclusion.
Data from America’s most advanced climate monitoring system shows the U.S. has undergone a cooling trend over the last decade, despite recent claims by government scientists that warming has accelerated worldwide during that time.
The U.S. Climate Reference Network was developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to provide “high-quality” climate data. The network consists of 114 stations across the U.S. in areas NOAA expects no development for the next 50 to 100 years.
The climate stations use three independent measurements of temperature and precipitation to provide “continuity of record and maintenance of well-calibrated and highly accurate observations,” NOAA states on its website. “The stations are placed in pristine environments expected to be free of development for many decades.” In essence, NOAA chose locations so they don’t need to be adjusted for “biases” in the temperature record.
Data compiled from these stations shows a slight cooling trend over the U.S. for the past decade.
This isn’t good news for the climate conspiracy theorists out there who think the oil industry secretly controls the weather and secretly pays bloggers to “cover up” the “truth” about the fossil fuel industry’s evil deeds.
This isn’t some “science denier” blog that released this data. It was the U.S. Climate Reference Network, which was developed by NOAA. You can’t get much more politically acceptable than that. And even their own data contradict what they’ve been saying for years.
Bite me you stupid idiot. your time will come soon when you get fired for being too stupid to be in charge of a lemonade stand.
Let her stand outside in her birthday suit for about 30 min in 0 degree temps,… then get back to me on that….