An America First Energy Plan | whitehouse.govThe page that once detailed the potential consequences of climate change was replaced by a page entitled, "An America First Energy Plan." which vows to eliminate “harmful and unnecessary policies” such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the United States rule.
www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy (http://www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy)
...and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the
Lou Henry Hoover | whitehouse.gov
www.whitehouse.gov/1600/first-ladies/louhoover (http://www.whitehouse.gov/1600/first-ladies/louhoover)
Charles D. Henry, decided that the climate of southern California would favor
Mamie Geneva Doud Eisenhower | whitehouse.gov
www.whitehouse.gov/1600/first-ladies/mamieeisenhower (http://www.whitehouse.gov/1600/first-ladies/mamieeisenhower)
...visits to relatives in the milder climate of San Antonio, Texas. There, in 1915
Update: Obama web pages archived at https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/ (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/)
hat tip to http://www.snopes.com/white-house-web-site-trump-changes/ (http://www.snopes.com/white-house-web-site-trump-changes/)
But I would still download and save stuff. "Accidents" happen, or so I am told.
Sadly, with Trump, what you see is what you get. He told people what he was going to do and now he's doing it. How shocking is that???
...
You do not constantly take away people's choices on energy and replace it with a lack of choice...
Trump just canceled National Park Service's twitter account because they showed how poorly attended his inauguration. The censorship and pettiness has begun. And of course this hinders NSPs ability to rally support when he starts mountaintop removal and other destructive extractive activities.
The energy plan is called 'American First' an old (and current) US Nazi Party slogan.
We in the US are now living in a one-party fascist state
National Park Service spokesman Thomas Crosson declined to comment on the tweeting ban, according to The Post. But he said that it is against Park Service policy to estimate the size of crowds at events, because they are often inaccurate.
thenewstribune.com (http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article127890279.html)
Meaning? What energy choices have been taken away?...
Fearing White House Purge Of Climate Science, Scientists Frantically Copying Data
(http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/01/22/white-house-begins-purging-climate-change-science/#2a7fd0656409)
In 2014, the Military Advisory Board came out with a report, called National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change, that discusses what the military sees as the threats of climate change and the actions to be taken to mitigate them:
“The potential security ramifications of global climate change should be serving as catalysts for cooperation and change. Instead, climate change impacts are already accelerating instability in vulnerable areas of the world and are serving as catalysts for conflict.”
<<Oops, this website was also taken down, but I did copy the information>>
Nobody is taking away coal. Markets decided.
Power plants generating 72 gigawatts (GW) of electricity in 37 states have either closed or are scheduled to shut their doors to comply with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations
The loss of generating capacity is “over seven times the amount originally predicted by EPA modeling,”
“Originally, EPA calculated that only 9.5 GW of electrical generating capacity would close as a result of its MATS (Mercury and Air Toxics Standard) and CSAPR (Cross State Air Pollution Rule) rules,”
“Before President Obama’s newly proposed [carbon dioxide] regulations on existing power plants even begin to take effect, however, it is clear that actual number will now be much higher,”(bold and underline are mine)
Over 94 percent of the closures involve coal-fired power plants, which currently provide one-fifth of the nation’s electricity, even though coal was the only fuel that was able to keep up with the higher demand during last January's polar vortex.
Coal accounts for the majority (41 percent) of the fuel generated for PJM's section of the grid, followed by nuclear (18 percent), natural gas (16 percent), and oil (6 percent)
Look, if you like eating mercury laden fish, go ahead keep polluting plants open. Or if you like your NOx and SOx in your air.
If nothing else EPA is severely understaffed to monitor what needs monitoring.
We should have never installed scrubbers anywhere then because that reduces people's choices. Welcome back acid rain because we need our energy and our choices. Seriously ?
If indeed coal plant closures were affecting grid reliability, i do not see it in the prices at PJM or the other markets. In fact i see utilities rushing to put in more solar, wind, natgas and powering/repowering hydro.
coal is dead. utilities recognize this already.
Big plans for EPAhttps://www.axios.com/axios-am-2207230091.html (https://www.axios.com/axios-am-2207230091.html)
Super Swan got his hands on the Trump team's "Agency Action" plan for the EPA. It's a tightly-held document that fleshes out Trump's campaign promises to gut the agency. It's the handiwork of Myron Ebell, director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Center for Energy and Environment. Trump appointed Ebell, a prominent opponent of climate change activists, to lead the EPA transition.
Our takeaway: Environmental Protection Agency is set for an absolute hammering under Trump.
The deets:
—"Potential opportunities for budget reductions": A category that includes $513 million in cuts to the "states and tribal assistance grants" … $193 million in savings from terminating climate programs … $109 million in savings from "environment programs and management."
Listed as initiatives to stop: "Clean Air Act greenhouse gas regulations for new (NSPS) and existing (ESPS or the 'Clean Power' Plan) coal and natural gas power plants … [CAFE] Standards … Clean Water Section 404: Waters of the U.S. Rule (wetlands) … TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) for Chesapeake Bay.
"Key opportunities": "Issue an executive order barring EPA from overruling federal/state regulatory/permit decisions unless in clear violation of established law."
Changing the way the EPA uses science: "Unless major reforms of the agency's use of science and economics are achieved, EPA will be able to return to its bad old ways as soon as an establishment administration takes office."
Will Fowler: Trump administration doesn't just want to restrict the EPA now they want to cripple it permanently. Deeply alarming
Myron Ebell, director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Center for Energy and Environment.For those not familiar with Ebell, he was one of seven “climate criminals” wanted for “destroying our future.” according to posters put up by activist groups during the 2015 Paris talks. Not that that means anything, but as a contrarian activist he's been one of the most persistent and well-organised global warming deniers over the years.
Donald Trump plans to 'reform' the way environmental agency uses science, report claims
Donald Trump is planning to "reform" the way that the Environmental Protection Agency uses science, according to a new report.
The new claim comes just days after the first thing on the new White House was an energy policy that called for the EPA to focus primarily on clean air and water, and not on its climate change activity. That same document didn't mention global warming at all – and neither does any other post on the administration's website.
That same approach appears to have carried on to the changes in the way that the EPA will use science in its work. A new document from inside the Trump camp says that the administration will seek to "reform" how the agency uses information.
Trump Declares His Inauguration Date as ‘Day of Patriotic Devotion’http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/01/23/trump-sets-day-of-patriotic-devotion.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/01/23/trump-sets-day-of-patriotic-devotion.html)
Donald Trump on Friday issued a proclamation declaring January 20, 2017, the day of his inauguration, a “National Day of Patriotic Devotion.” The decree was uploaded to the Federal Register on Monday and spotted by journalist Ken Klippenstein. The document is scheduled for official publication on Tuesday. “I, Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 20, 2017, as National Day of Patriotic Devotion, in order to strengthen our bonds to each other and to our country—and to renew the duties of Government to the people,” the decree reads.
ClimatechangePsychology took a snapshot from the wikipedia page of The new climate change denier head of CIA anticipating much rewrite. Hopefully this gets to be stored outside US too : http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.fi/2017/01/our-new-cia-head-mike-pompeo-tea-party.html (http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.fi/2017/01/our-new-cia-head-mike-pompeo-tea-party.html)Clearly a very capable man: a mechanical engineer before he became a lawyer, and first in his class at West Point is no small achievement. So, what causes him to reject mainstream science and become a climate contrarian? It just doesn't scan.
The Trump administration has imposed a freeze on grants and contracts by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a move that could affect a significant part of the agency’s budget allocations and even threaten to disrupt core operations ranging from toxic cleanups to water quality testing, according to records and interviews.https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-administration-imposes-freeze-on-epa-grants-and-contracts (https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-administration-imposes-freeze-on-epa-grants-and-contracts)
In one email exchange obtained by ProPublica on Monday, an EPA contracting officer concluded a note to a storm water management employee this way:
“Right now we are in a holding pattern. The new EPA administration has asked that all contract and grant awards be temporarily suspended, effective immediately. Until we receive further clarification, this includes task orders and work assignments.”
...
Monday night, Myron Ebell, who ran the EPA transition for the incoming administration, confirmed the basics of the freeze, but said the actions were not unprecedented.
“They’re trying to freeze things to make sure nothing happens they don’t want to have happen, so any regulations going forward, contracts, grants, hires, they want to make sure to look at them first,” said Ebell, who returned over the weekend to his position directing energy and global warming policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free-market, industry-aligned group that has long fought the EPA’s growth and influence....
In this 9-minute video of DT speaking at the start of his "business leaders" meeting, he mentions "reducing regulations by 75%" to lessen the burdens on manufacturing.
“We want to start making our products again”: President Trump meets with business leaders
https://twitter.com/cnn/status/823539914054782976
The government's top public health agency has canceled a conference next month on climate change and health but isn't saying why publicly.http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/cdc-cancels-conference-climate-change-health-n711076 (http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/cdc-cancels-conference-climate-change-health-n711076)
But a co-sponsor was told by the Centers for Disease and Prevention that the agency was worried how the conference would be viewed by the Trump administration.
This is just insane. The guy has kids. Is he so hollow that their future means nothing compared to money and power? Sociopath?
WASHINGTON ― Multiple federal agencies have told their employees to cease communications with members of Congress and the press, sources have told The Huffington Post.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-communication-freeze_us_58878b3ae4b0441a8f7114e2 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-communication-freeze_us_58878b3ae4b0441a8f7114e2)
The freeze has startled aides on the Hill and people at those agencies, who worry that it could abruptly upend current operations and stifle work and discussions that routinely take place between branches of government.
Officials at sub-agencies of the Department of Health and Human Services, for example, have been told not to send “any correspondence to public officials” according to a memo shared with HuffPost. Instead, they have been asked to refer questions to agency leadership until the leadership has had time to meet with incoming White House staff about the new administration’s policies and objectives, according to a congressional official who was also informed of the communications freeze.
An official with the National Institutes of Health told HuffPost after the initial publication of this piece that an email had been sent to the directors of NIH institutes and centers providing guidance from HHS on how to handle new or pending regulation, policy or guidance.
“The HHS guidance instructs HHS Operating Divisions to hold on publishing new rules or guidance in the Federal Register or other public forums and discussing them with public officials until the Administration has had an opportunity to review them,” the official said....
Trump seeks 'balance' on climate — spokesman
Robin Bravender
January 23, 2017
E&E News
698 Words
President Trump is looking to "balance" environmental policies with economic growth, his spokesman told reporters today.
In his first formal press briefing from the White House, Trump spokesman Sean Spicer was asked about the president's plans for addressing climate change.
"I think he's going to meet with his team, figure out what policies are best for the environment," Spicer said.
He actually said that we a straight face...??
This is just insane. The guy has kids. Is he so hollow that their future means nothing compared to money and power? Sociopath?
I'm thinking dementia, actually. That would explain the continual lying, forgetting, illogic, and inability to alter his abnormal social behavior (e.g., 3am tweets).
AbruptSLR,
I guess you've never served in the Army.... ;D ;D ;D
That describes 90% of the people I worked alongside there.
ClimatechangePsychology took a snapshot from the wikipedia page of The new climate change denier head of CIA anticipating much rewrite. Hopefully this gets to be stored outside US too : http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.fi/2017/01/our-new-cia-head-mike-pompeo-tea-party.html (http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.fi/2017/01/our-new-cia-head-mike-pompeo-tea-party.html)Clearly a very capable man: a mechanical engineer before he became a lawyer, and first in his class at West Point is no small achievement. So, what causes him to reject mainstream science and become a climate contrarian? It just doesn't scan.
ClimatechangePsychology took a snapshot from the wikipedia page of The new climate change denier head of CIA anticipating much rewrite. Hopefully this gets to be stored outside US too : http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.fi/2017/01/our-new-cia-head-mike-pompeo-tea-party.html (http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.fi/2017/01/our-new-cia-head-mike-pompeo-tea-party.html)Clearly a very capable man: a mechanical engineer before he became a lawyer, and first in his class at West Point is no small achievement. So, what causes him to reject mainstream science and become a climate contrarian? It just doesn't scan.
Robert E Lee was #2 in his USMA class, and we know what he was willing to do to the United States. The Academies are full of exceptional men and women, but there are also plenty of "true believers".
In this 9-minute video of DT speaking at the start of his "business leaders" meeting yesterday, he mentions "reducing regulations by 75%" to lessen the burdens on manufacturing.
“We want to start making our products again”: President Trump meets with business leaders
https://twitter.com/cnn/status/823539914054782976
In this 9-minute video of DT speaking at the start of his "business leaders" meeting yesterday, he mentions "reducing regulations by 75%" to lessen the burdens on manufacturing.
“We want to start making our products again”: President Trump meets with business leaders
https://twitter.com/cnn/status/823539914054782976
Business and corporate America will generally either seize on this opportunity, or drift there with a shrug of metaphorical shoulders, "the government said we could"
As consumers, employees, or share holders, if we observe businesses and corporations turning to environmental degradation (beyond what exists today) based on a loosening controls structure, we need to hold them accountable with our $$ and with our voices.
In this 9-minute video of DT speaking at the start of his "business leaders" meeting yesterday, he mentions "reducing regulations by 75%" to lessen the burdens on manufacturing.
“We want to start making our products again”: President Trump meets with business leaders
https://twitter.com/cnn/status/823539914054782976
Business and corporate America will generally either seize on this opportunity, or drift there with a shrug of metaphorical shoulders, "the government said we could"
As consumers, employees, or share holders, if we observe businesses and corporations turning to environmental degradation (beyond what exists today) based on a loosening controls structure, we need to hold them accountable with our $$ and with our voices.
Opportunists maybe. Companies with a long history (or future) will weigh current but also future possible regulations. If they have international operations will also look to EU and Canada/Asia. They won't relax for 4 years only to have to pay bigly in the next change. It will be a long wait and see...
In this 9-minute video of DT speaking at the start of his "business leaders" meeting yesterday, he mentions "reducing regulations by 75%" to lessen the burdens on manufacturing.
“We want to start making our products again”: President Trump meets with business leaders
https://twitter.com/cnn/status/823539914054782976
Business and corporate America will generally either seize on this opportunity, or drift there with a shrug of metaphorical shoulders, "the government said we could"
As consumers, employees, or share holders, if we observe businesses and corporations turning to environmental degradation (beyond what exists today) based on a loosening controls structure, we need to hold them accountable with our $$ and with our voices.
Opportunists maybe. Companies with a long history (or future) will weigh current but also future possible regulations. If they have international operations will also look to EU and Canada/Asia. They won't relax for 4 years only to have to pay bigly in the next change. It will be a long wait and see...
I agree in that large established organizations, with high brand recognition and value, along with internal ethics and values, are much more likely to "do the right thing" WRT to the environment, carbon footprint, and renewables. If they try otherwise employees will be the first to stand up and object.
We need to worry about the obvious companies, in the FF and energy sectors, mass agriculture and manufacturing, and elsewhere, that are less inclined to operate from a position of values and concern for the environment.
pileus, I think in this case the reason is money. Pompeo went into the pipeline business after the army and is employed by the gas industry. A startling state of affairs, when the man is responsible for providing facts about national security issues.ClimatechangePsychology took a snapshot from the wikipedia page of The new climate change denier head of CIA anticipating much rewrite. Hopefully this gets to be stored outside US too : http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.fi/2017/01/our-new-cia-head-mike-pompeo-tea-party.html (http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.fi/2017/01/our-new-cia-head-mike-pompeo-tea-party.html)Clearly a very capable man: a mechanical engineer before he became a lawyer, and first in his class at West Point is no small achievement. So, what causes him to reject mainstream science and become a climate contrarian? It just doesn't scan.
Robert E Lee was #2 in his USMA class, and we know what he was willing to do to the United States. The Academies are full of exceptional men and women, but there are also plenty of "true believers".
A US national park has posted a series of tweets about climate change that were later deleted.
"Today, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is higher than at any time in the last 650,000 years. #climate," said one of the tweets.
The posts by Badlands National Park in South Dakota were widely shared but had all been removed by Tuesday evening.
The National Park Service shut its own Twitter operation briefly on Friday after an apparent clampdown.
The park service had retweeted photos about turnout at President Donald Trump's inauguration.
But the accounts were reactivated the next day after an apology for "mistaken" retweets.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration has instructed the Environmental Protection Agency to remove the climate change page from its website, two agency employees told Reuters, the latest move by the newly minted leadership to erase ex-President Barack Obama’s climate change initiatives.
The employees were notified by EPA officials on Tuesday that the administration had instructed EPA’s communications team to remove the website’s climate change page, which contains links to scientific global warming research, as well as detailed data on emissions. The page could go down as early as Wednesday, the sources said.
The U.S. National Archives' buddy icon
DOCUMERICA Project by the Environmental Protection Agency
For the Documerica Project (1971-1977), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hired freelance photographers to capture images relating to environmental problems, EPA activities, and everyday life in the 1970s.
The U.S. National Archives digitized more than 15,000 photographs from the series Documerica (Local ID 412-DA) and included them in our online catalog. Our Web site has quick catalog search links for featured DOCUMERICA topics, locations, and photographers.
If you think that companies fhat you put in the second category like examplr ExxonMobil, do not have ethics and values that are similar to other large corporations ( that you include in the first category ) you are making a big mistake. And they will rise up...
Maybe having extreme narcissistic personality disorder is what makes them dangerous :P
The Department of Agriculture has reportedly lifted an order that called for scientists and employees of its research arm not to release any of its work to the public.http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316015-agriculture-department-lifts-order-for-lockdown-on-its-research-arm (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316015-agriculture-department-lifts-order-for-lockdown-on-its-research-arm)
After a report that the agency had told staff to stop releasing any "news releases, photos, fact sheets, news feeds, and social media content,” BuzzFeed reported that another memo was sent Tuesday night from a top official for the department’s Agricultural Research Service that the original order should not have been issued and “is hereby rescinded.” ...
An Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) spokesman said the Trump administration is not currently planning to take down website content regarding climate change.http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/316081-epa-spokesman-no-plan-to-take-down-climate-webpages (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/316081-epa-spokesman-no-plan-to-take-down-climate-webpages)
Doug Ericksen, spokesman for the so-called beachhead team working to transition the agency to the Trump administration, said officials are reviewing all of the “editorial” parts of the EPA’s website for possible changes. ...
Tuesday marked a flurry of actions by the Trump administration that have cut off some federal scientists from the outside world.http://www.climatecentral.org/news/silenced-federal-agencies-are-violating-their-own-policies-21105 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/silenced-federal-agencies-are-violating-their-own-policies-21105)
The news, reported by outlets including ProPublica, the Huffington Post, BuzzFeed and the Associated Press, centers around the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Agriculture. The outlets reported that there is a ban in place that prohibits scientists from talking to the press and performing outreach via news pages and social media.
The ban violates federal scientific integrity policies that began under the Bush administration and were strengthened during the Obama administration. Those policies are in place to encourage the flow of scientific information between agencies and the taxpayers they serve, free of any political interference. The showdown happening now could be the first of many fights between federal scientists and the Trump administration, which has shown hostility toward science and science-based policy. ...
Maybe having extreme narcissistic personality disorder is what makes them dangerous :P
No, no, it makes them predictable when given an order... ::) ::)
Is there anyone here who is downloading info before it's gone? What exactly are scientists doing to preserve records?
...In just a few days, Trump has embarked on a systematic effort to discount and obscure concerns over climate and the environment, even as he has opened the door for an industry takeover of public lands. Most shocking, of course, are Trump’s moves to silence federal scientists who work in the public interest on the most pressing issue of our time — even of all time. If climate and environmental scientists aren’t allowed to do their job — understanding our rapidly changing planet and how we can work to lessen the impact of our actions for the benefit of all living things on Earth and then share that knowledge with the public — we are all at risk.https://psmag.com/trumps-attacks-on-science-represent-a-national-security-threat-b10cc05f7d69
...
The outrage we’re all seeing at these moves is a hopeful sign. This weekend was the largest day of protest in United States history, and for good reason. Already, there are plans for marches in the coming weeks that could bring hundreds of thousands of people back to Washington on behalf of science and the environment. ...
Is there anyone here who is downloading info before it's gone? What exactly are scientists doing to preserve records?
On Inauguration Day, a grim rain hammered Los Angeles for most of the morning and into the afternoon, part of a record-setting series of storms that would cause flooding, mudslides, and evacuations across southern California. Meanwhile, in a nondescript Lego-block building housing the department of Graduate Education and Information Studies on the UCLA campus, a diverse group gathered over their laptops for reasons practically as grim.
Inspired by and in conjunction with other “hackathons” at the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Toronto, the group’s mission was to preserve and protect precious scientific data related to climate change and environmental regulation by scraping as much information from the Department of Energy website as time would allow. They called it “a guerrilla archiving event.”
Read more at Paste magazine. (https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2017/01/inside-the-race-to-save-climate-data-in-the-age-of.html)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is mandating that any studies or data from scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency undergo review by political appointees before they can be released to the public.https://apnews.com/c1423276fb574b07953651a68a082db9/EPA-science-under-scrutiny-by-Trump-political-staff (https://apnews.com/c1423276fb574b07953651a68a082db9/EPA-science-under-scrutiny-by-Trump-political-staff)
The communications director for President Donald Trump's transition team at EPA, Doug Ericksen, said Wednesday the review also extends to content on the federal agency's website, including details of scientific evidence showing that the Earth's climate is warming and man-made carbon emissions are to blame.
Former EPA staffers said Wednesday the restrictions imposed under Trump far exceed the practices of past administrations.
Ericksen said no orders have been given to strip mention of climate change from www.epa.gov (http://www.epa.gov) , saying no decisions have yet been made.
We're taking a look at everything on a case-by-case basis, including the web page and whether climate stuff will be taken down," Erickson said in an interview with The Associated Press. "Obviously with a new administration coming in, the transition time, we'll be taking a look at the web pages and the Facebook pages and everything else involved here at EPA."
Asked specifically about scientific data collected by agency scientists, such as routine monitoring of air and water pollution, Ericksen responded, "Everything is subject to review." ...
Yesterday Elon Musk stunned us (and just about everyone else) by tweeting in support of Rex Tillerson, former CEO of ExxonMobil and likely Secretary of State under the Trump administration. Musk’s public image is that of a tycoon using his influence to innovate towards a techno-utopian future powered by clean energy and complete with human cities on Mars. What could he possibly have in common with a mogul who made his fortune sucking the Earth’s resources dry? We asked him. And today he answered. ...http://gizmodo.com/a-brief-chat-with-elon-musk-about-climate-change-rex-t-1791620750 (http://gizmodo.com/a-brief-chat-with-elon-musk-about-climate-change-rex-t-1791620750)
Climate Marchhttps://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-climate-change-scientists-activists-232105474.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-climate-change-scientists-activists-232105474.html)
Activists are also planning the People’s Climate March on April 29 in Washington D.C. and across the nation, the Sierra Club announced Wednesday.
“The April 29th march comes in response to widespread outrage against President Trump’s disastrous anti-climate agenda - including his executive orders yesterday advancing the Keystone and Dakota Access pipelines,” said the organization in a statement.
The last People’s Climate March was in 2014 in New York City, where more than 400,000 people gathered. This year’s event will coincide with the end of Trump’s first 100 days in office.
What is the Scientists' March on Washingtonhttp://www.scientistsmarchonwashington.com (http://www.scientistsmarchonwashington.com)
Welcome! We want to thank you all for your incredible outpouring of support for this march. We are working to schedule a March for Science on DC and across the United States. We have not settled on a date yet but will do so as quickly as possible and announce it here.
Although this will start with a march, we hope to use this as a starting point to take a stand for science in politics. Slashing funding and restricting scientists from communicating their findings (from tax-funded research!) with the public is absurd and cannot be allowed to stand as policy. This is a non-partisan issue that reaches far beyond people in the STEM fields and should concern anyone who values empirical research and science.
For American science, the next four years look to be challenging. The newly inaugurated President Trump, and many of his Cabinet picks, have repeatedly cast doubt upon the reality of human-made climate change, questioned the repeatedly proven safety of vaccines. Since the inauguration, the administration has already frozen grants and contracts by the Environmental Protection Agency and gagged researchers at the US Department of Agriculture. Many scientists are asking themselves: What can I do?https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/thanks-to-trump-scientists-are-planning-to-run-for-office/514229/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/thanks-to-trump-scientists-are-planning-to-run-for-office/514229/)
And the answer from a newly formed group called 314 Action is: Get elected.
The organization, named after the first three digits of pi, is a political action committee that was created to support scientists in running for office. It’s the science version of Emily’s List, which focuses on pro-choice female candidates, or VoteVets, which backs war veterans. “A lot of scientists traditionally feel that science is above politics but we’re seeing that politics is not above getting involved in science,” says founder Shaughnessy Naughton. “We’re losing, and the only way to stop that is to get more people with scientific backgrounds at the table.”
...
Early signs are promising. In just two weeks, more than 400 people have signed up to the recruitment form on the organization’s site. They include Jacquelyn Gill from the University of Maine, who studies how prehistoric climate change shaped life on the planet. “If you’d told me a year ago that I would consider running for office, I would have laughed,” she says. “I always fantasized about serving an administration in an advisory capacity, but we now have explicitly anti-science people in office and in the Cabinet. Waiting passively for people to tap me for my expertise won’t be enough.”
Did anyone clue into the statement by Trump that he didn’t need “more legislation”; that the US already had enough legislation; that it just needed to be used.
This, essentially, removes Congress and the Senate from the decision process for much of what Trump is trying to do.
Predictable but still not very good news. Obama was using this for years. Now the boot is on the other foot.
President Trump has told the United States Department of Energy Sunshot team that they are not allowed to communicate any information to the public until political appointments are made to review all of said communications per a report from Samantha Page at ThinkProgress.https://electrek.co/2017/01/26/trump-silences-the-department-of-energys-sunshot-team/ (https://electrek.co/2017/01/26/trump-silences-the-department-of-energys-sunshot-team/)
...
From the Sunshot website,
The U.S. Department of Energy SunShot Initiative is a national effort to support solar energy adoption by making solar energy affordable for all Americans through research and development efforts in collaboration with public and private partners. SunShot funds cooperative research, development, demonstration, and deployment projects by private companies, universities, state and local governments, nonprofit organizations, and national laboratories to drive down the cost of solar electricity.
...
Any information released by the Sunshot group would be of a technical nature that communicates research advancements. The Sunshot team does not research climate change or pollution, which makes the move to silence them even more strange....
The SunShot initiative hoped to reduce the total costs of PV solar energy systems by about 75 percent so that they were cost-competitive with other forms of energy without subsidies before 2020. Chu said that SunShot would work to bring down the cost of solar -- by focusing on four main pillars:https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Sunshot-1-Per-Watt-Solar-Cost-Goal-Mission-Accomplished-Years-Ahead-of-S (https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Sunshot-1-Per-Watt-Solar-Cost-Goal-Mission-Accomplished-Years-Ahead-of-S)
- Technologies for solar cells and arrays
- Power electronics to optimize the performance of the installation
- Improvements in solar manufacturing processes
- Installation, design and permitting for solar energy systems
In fact, steep reductions in system pricing have stemmed not just from modules, but also from price reductions in inverters, trackers and even labor costs. It's only stubborn soft costs such as customer acquisition that have actually risen....
The linked article is entitled: "The nation’s top scientists can’t get through to Trump — and they’re alarmed". It looks like the White House is denying access for scientific leaders to even present their case against muzzling science.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/01/26/leaders-of-science-organizations-dismayed-by-trump-administration-moves/?utm_term=.51cb8c1fd134 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/01/26/leaders-of-science-organizations-dismayed-by-trump-administration-moves/?utm_term=.51cb8c1fd134)
Extract: "Leaders of several of the nation's top science organizations say they've been shunned by the Trump administration and are alarmed by signs that the administration will muzzle government researchers and reject the scientific evidence that informs such critical issues as vaccine safety and climate change."
That is a scary thought ASLR..... Policy divorced from science !!! Reverse renaissance....Back to the dark ages...
That is a scary thought ASLR..... Policy divorced from science !!! Reverse renaissance....Back to the dark ages...
And at such a crucial time.
Maybe we could disallow science deniers the use of technology and medicine. If you don't believe in science, you shouldn't be able to participate in all the wonders it has created. I think the problem would become self-correcting quite quickly. :)
That is a scary thought ASLR..... Policy divorced from science !!! Reverse renaissance....Back to the dark ages...Thankfully, only in America at this time. The effects of a new dark age in one country would be inconvenient, but not the end of the world. America has more direct means to achieve that.
Former Vice President Al Gore is hosting his own climate change summit after the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention abruptly canceled the one it had been planning for months.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/al-gore-climate-health-cdc_us_588a6a2be4b0303c0752b0bc (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/al-gore-climate-health-cdc_us_588a6a2be4b0303c0752b0bc)
Gore announced Thursday that he’ll hold the Climate & Health Meeting in Atlanta on Feb. 16 with Howard Frumkin, former director of the CDC’s National Center for Environmental Health, and a host of other health and climate groups: the American Public Health Association, The Climate Reality Project, Harvard Global Health Institute and the University of Washington Center for Health and the Global Environment.
Right now, anxiety is sweeping across the scientific community about the Trump administration's efforts to make climate data disappear.http://mashable.com/2017/01/26/youth-climate-lawsuit-trump-website-removals/ (http://mashable.com/2017/01/26/youth-climate-lawsuit-trump-website-removals/)
However, there are now a very special group of 21 young Americans, ages nine to 20, who are throwing a sizable wrench in the Trump administration's plans. Their lawsuit against the federal government and fossil fuel companies seeks to hold them accountable for failing to adequately address human-caused global warming despite widespread knowledge of the risks.
The case, formally known as Juliana v United States, is scheduled to go to trial sometime this year, and has already set groundbreaking legal precedents in the nascent field of climate change law.
On Wednesday, lawyers for the young plaintiffs hit the government and fossil fuel industry with a letter that could make it much harder for the Trump administration to take websites offline without archiving them.
An expansive case
The students' lawyers delivered a legal preservation notice to fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil, industry trade associations and the federal government.
Because the case is extremely expansive in scope — it seeks to prove that the government and energy industry knew about the dangers of burning fossil fuels for decades, yet continued to promote a fossil fuel-based energy system — any destruction or hiding of scientific evidence by the Trump administration could threaten the students' ability to make their case.
And if a judge agrees with the kids, taking down the websites without archiving them could lead to monetary and trial penalties for the defendants. Depending on the climate data, some federal laws may restrict the information scrubbing.
"The U.S. Department of Justice and Sidley Austin are required by law to preserve all documents, including electronically stored information, that could be relevant to our 21 youth plaintiffs' case against the Trump Administration,” said Julia Olson, executive director of Our Children’s Trust and attorney for the plaintiffs, in a statement. Sidley Austin is the law firm representing the private sector defendants, which also include trade groups for oil and gas companies.
If the Trump administration intends to strangle the flow of climate change information produced by the federal bureaucracy, it will be no small task.https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25012017/climate-change-bureaucracy-epa-donald-trump
The government apparatus of climate policy involves dozens of agencies and offices, as this chart shows, and they spend billions of dollars a year. Their public activities number in the hundreds, from rules and scientific reports to research programs, webinars and internships. Thousands of employees, grant recipients and contractors are engaged in federal climate science, policy and communications.
...
The art of the deal, or according to Donald Trump "lie your ass off until you can sell your sub standard products". Trump will say anything to get what he wants, a life of white, wealthy privilege has made sure that he can get away with that. Why would he change now that he is 70 years old and president of the US? He won't.
Elon Musk on the other hand, made his fortune by making products above and beyond the competition. No sleazy lies needed to make his billions. Elon Musk is also on a mission to save the world, he has the closest thing to an actual working solution to climate change and other limits of growth. He must defend that solution for the sake of all our lives. And thats what he is doing.
Trump needs time before he can assert his power over the US. Having a well respected man like Musk lend him some credibility while he asserts power is a great way to buy some time. Elon on the other hand is facing the danger of Donald Trump destroying everything. So Trump promises Elon fair treatment and Elon in exchange shows some public support.
Except that Trump is a liar. As soon as Trump asserts his power, he will turn on Elon as easy as he has turned on most people that have ever done business with him. So I think Elon is wrong about trusting Trump.
However as the man holding the only working solution to climate change and a veritable genius I have no other option but to trust that he knows what he is doing. He must do whatever he needs to do to keep Tesla afloat. As far as I am concern it is a matter of survival. So I'm with Elon, even if Elon is collaborating with a lying fool.
I do worry that others will abandon Musk and Tesla lose the great support he has enjoyed. Maybe that is exactly Trump's plan to get rid of clean energy to make way for Putin's oil.
Putin does not have that much oil to make way for....
This is just insane. The guy has kids. Is he so hollow that their future means nothing compared to money and power? Sociopath?
Elon Musk on the other hand, made his fortune by making products above and beyond the competition. No sleazy lies needed to make his billions.That's partially true. Like so many of the big dot.com successes, x.com and PayPal succeeded by being in the right place at the right time, particularly by being brought by eBay. Plenty of the early dot.com billionaires were essentially lottery winners. Tesla on the other hand is an exceptional achievement.
Elon Musk on the other hand, made his fortune by making products above and beyond the competition. No sleazy lies needed to make his billions.That's partially true. Like so many of the big dot.com successes, x.com and PayPal succeeded by being in the right place at the right time, particularly by being brought by eBay. Plenty of the early dot.com billionaires were essentially lottery winners. Tesla on the other hand is an exceptional achievement.
The era of climate change denial is over. Rejection of the unequivocal scientific evidence that carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are warming the planet and changing our climate is no longer socially acceptable. Only the most fringe of politicians now disputes the overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is real and human-caused, and they are largely ignored.http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/317102-climate-denial-is-dead-long-live-climate-denial (http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/317102-climate-denial-is-dead-long-live-climate-denial)
So why dignify the notion of climate change denial by writing about it?
Such was the criticism I received from many well-meaning fellow climate scientists last fall after I published my latest book, “The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial Is Threatening Our Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy,” co-authored with Washington Post editorial cartoonist Tom Toles.
I wish the critics had been right. But of course, they weren’t.
Our book couldn’t seem any more prophetic now. For we are firmly back in the madhouse. Climate change denial is once again in vogue in Washington, D.C. As of Jan. 20, it is now the official policy of our executive branch....
GOP House votes to reject Obama administration stream protection rule
A war on science is a war he’s guaranteed to lose. Trump can deny the science, silence the scientists, censor their reports, even fire them from government agencies - but that won’t stop the Earth from heating and its climate from changing at a dangerous rate. At best he would survive a four or eight-year term, leave the planet a worse place for future generations, and be seen as a villain in the history books.
But it looks as though scientists and journalists aren’t going to let that happen without a fight, and kudos to them for standing up to the anti-science bullies on behalf of the planet and future generations. We’ll all have to do our parts to protect science and hold the administration accountable to facts and truth for the next four years.
If the Canadian experience can teach U.S. scientists anything, it’s that not only their future research but also their past work is at risk. “Watch your libraries,” May said. “Stuff was taken away in dumpsters. Raw data and archives were lost.” There is enough collective anxiety about U.S. climate data being destroyed, altered, or lost that several groups of concerned citizens spent the months before Trump’s Inauguration copying federal data and moving it to other servers. “Within weeks of Harper becoming Canada’s Prime Minster, the climate-change information was scrubbed from the Web site of Environment Canada and researchers were muzzled,” May said. “That took weeks. Trump is a lot faster.”A couple of things the USA can look up to as positives. One: There is a far stronger wealthier private scientific establishment. Two: Suing is a routine act about everything there and Trump is quickly burning up any good that might have gone his way in that respect. Third: The media. Broadcasting, Hollywood, social media is far more active and influential on a per capita basis then Canada and therefore could help things along (granted most of that comes from immigrants who know how to use it).
Berkeley hackathon to collect data from NASA’s earth sciences programs and the Department of Energy, are doing more than archiving. Diehard coders are building robust systems to monitor ongoing changes to government websites. And they’re keeping track of what’s already been removed—because yes, the pruning has already begun.
GOP Plots To Clip NASA Wings As It Tweets Climate Change Updates
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58a91361e4b045cd34c2689e? (http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58a91361e4b045cd34c2689e?)
My 17 year old daughter went along to an anti trump demo as the UK parliament were debating his visit. It was her first political demo.
would any other person have caused such global outpourings?
If anything Trump is radicalising millions around the world. Folk who would not consider themselves political are attending rallies. Who else would have caused such a reaction?
Advantage out of adversity eh?
Is that guy Happer really equating the souls of jews and carbon dioxide? Does carbon dioxide have a soul? I'm not familiar with the Trumpistan Religion, that's why the question.Geriatrics and science make strange bedfellows.
The reference:
https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/02/25/trump-potential-science-adviser-will-happer-carbon-dioxide-demonized-jews (https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/02/25/trump-potential-science-adviser-will-happer-carbon-dioxide-demonized-jews)
And I think it is bc that is true for them. They've never had to 'fight' to have a legitimate place in this field.
No one has ever questioned whether they should even be at the table making decisions. They don't get silenced just for who they are.
Marginalized groups KNOW that if we don't force our way to the table we will NEVER get invited.
We know that even our place at that table is questioned. For instance, if a white man gets a job then it is bc he is qualified.
If a person from a marginalized group gets a job it is bc they "probably want to increase diversity".
I'm the only women PI in my deparmtent & people who I love have even suggested that I just had to be competent to be hired bc 'diversity'.
Which pretty much says, "I don't know if you actually belong here but it looks good on paper to have you here."
Now that scientists have been labeled by our admin as a group that doesn't deserve a voice, men who have never dealt with that have no clue
They think that pushing back is seen as disruptive & polarizing bc they have never had to do it.
They don't realize the reason they're seeing those who don't look like them across the table is bc we have done just that our entire career.
So, no. Staying silent is not going to help. If you want a voice then you have to scream it as loud as you can....
"The Web Snapshot consists of static content, such as web pages and reports in Portable Document Format (PDF), as that content appeared on EPA's website as of January 19, 2017," according to a statement on the mirror site. Live databases and large information sources are not mirrored, so if you want those, you should grab them from the regular EPA site right now; the mirror site provides links.https://www.fastcoexist.com/3068319/you-can-now-access-the-epa-website-as-it-existed-before-trump (https://www.fastcoexist.com/3068319/you-can-now-access-the-epa-website-as-it-existed-before-trump)
...Some worry these changes signal the EPA’s new direction—one that prioritizes business interests over public health and science—under new Administrator Scott Pruitt, who has close ties to fossil-fuel companies. Pruitt didn’t mention public health once in his first speech to agency employees, instead focusing on improving the EPA’s relationship with private interests. In a tweet after his speech, Pruitt said he was committed to working with several types of “stakeholders” on environmental stewardship. He did not mention environmentalists as one of those stakeholders.https://newrepublic.com/article/141174/epas-science-office-removed-science-mission-statement
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a science advocacy organization, shares EDGI’s concerns. “The role of the EPA is to protect public health and safety,” said Andrew Rosenberg, Director of UCS’s Center for Science and Democracy. “So what you want a science office to do is make sure you’re using the best science available, and what’s safe for the public. That’s a pretty critical role.”
Rosenberg said it would be a “major change in direction” if the EPA stopped prioritizing the best science and focused instead on what’s most “economically achievable” for businesses. “I think we have to be very mindful,” he said. “It seems like this EPA and this administration broadly seem to view their job as being a support for business as opposed to safeguarding public health.”
One thing that climate and environmental science in general (and the environment itself) is, is global. Who knows what the consequences will be if Trump succeeds in ripping apart the US environmental science fabric.
What has this "climate and environmental science" effectively done to reverse ANYTHING?
We can only be observers as this runaway train is speeding into the abyss.
Of course, You're free to believe You can shout at the tide not to come in- by coming up with more and more observational data.
Or blame one particular leader.
QuoteOne thing that climate and environmental science in general (and the environment itself) is, is global. Who knows what the consequences will be if Trump succeeds in ripping apart the US environmental science fabric.
What has this "climate and environmental science" effectively done to reverse ANYTHING?
We can only be observers as this runaway train is speeding into the abyss.
Of course, You're free to believe You can shout at the tide not to come in- by coming up with more and more observational data.
Or blame one particular leader.
[Responding here as this thread seems more on-topic than the freezing thread...]
Climate and environmental science establish cause and effect and measure change. It provides the framework in which one can successfully make predictions about how changes today will affect the future. The science informs what policies can stop this runaway train.
Ripping apart the science implies not attempting policies to halt the widespread changes we make to the environment. When we all need to work together to move in the right direction, those moving in the wrong direction not only impede progress, but also sap the will of the weak.
No surprise and we all knew this was coming, but EPA chief Scott Pruitt stated during a live TV interview that he believes CO2 is not the primary contributor to global warming.
Here is a statement from the Sierra Club
http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2017/03/statement-pruitt-misled-congress-co2-senators-should-demand-he-be-removed-his (http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2017/03/statement-pruitt-misled-congress-co2-senators-should-demand-he-be-removed-his)
The greenhouse gas effect traps outgoing longwave radiation causing a
radiative imbalance of Earth, ultimately leading to the warming of the globe.
...
•Do you disagree that additional greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere, such
as carbon dioxide, will cause a smaller magnitude outgoing longwave radiation to
escape to space? Please explain.
•Do you disagree that the burning of fossil fuels, such as oil or natural gas, cause
carbon dioxide to be released into the atmosphere? Please explain.
•Do you disagree that if fossil fuels were not extracted and burned, less carbon
dioxide would be released into the atmosphere? Please explain.
•Therefore, is it possible, if not probable, that humans releasing greenhouse
gases into the atmosphere could cause more heat to be trapped by the
atmosphere? Please explain.
Answer
I will work to ensure that any regulatory actions are based on
the most up to date and objective scientific data, including the ever-evolving
understanding of the impact increasing greenhouse gases have on our
changing climate.
I also believe the Administrator has an important role when it comes to the regulation of carbon dioxide, which I will fulfill consistent with Massachusetts v. EPA and the agency's Endangerment Finding on Greenhouse Gases respective of the applicable statutory framework established by Congress.
No surprise and we all knew this was coming, but EPA chief Scott Pruitt stated during a live TV interview that he believes CO2 is not the primary contributor to global warming.
Here is a statement from the Sierra Club
http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2017/03/statement-pruitt-misled-congress-co2-senators-should-demand-he-be-removed-his (http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2017/03/statement-pruitt-misled-congress-co2-senators-should-demand-he-be-removed-his)
The ref for misleading congress seems to beQuoteThe greenhouse gas effect traps outgoing longwave radiation causing a
radiative imbalance of Earth, ultimately leading to the warming of the globe.
...
•Do you disagree that additional greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere, such
as carbon dioxide, will cause a smaller magnitude outgoing longwave radiation to
escape to space? Please explain.
•Do you disagree that the burning of fossil fuels, such as oil or natural gas, cause
carbon dioxide to be released into the atmosphere? Please explain.
•Do you disagree that if fossil fuels were not extracted and burned, less carbon
dioxide would be released into the atmosphere? Please explain.
•Therefore, is it possible, if not probable, that humans releasing greenhouse
gases into the atmosphere could cause more heat to be trapped by the
atmosphere? Please explain.
Answer
I will work to ensure that any regulatory actions are based on
the most up to date and objective scientific data, including the ever-evolving
understanding of the impact increasing greenhouse gases have on our
changing climate.
Hmm, is there a few defences possible here:
I will work to ensure that, but in the meantime I haven't yet had time absorb all the nuances of the science and when I state my opinions that isn't a regulatory action so there is no contradiction.
Saying he believes in 'ever-evolving understanding' seems like it might be code for I don't believe the science is settled.
Perhaps it is more this part of the answer:QuoteI also believe the Administrator has an important role when it comes to the regulation of carbon dioxide, which I will fulfill consistent with Massachusetts v. EPA and the agency's Endangerment Finding on Greenhouse Gases respective of the applicable statutory framework established by Congress.
Can stating such an opinion be regarded as separate from 'role when it comes to the regulation of carbon dioxide'? Possibly not?
Seventeen conservative Republican members of Congress—10 of them in their first or second terms—are bucking long-time party positions and the new occupant of the White House. They announced on Wednesday that they’re supporting a clear statement about the risks associated with climate change, as well as principles for how best to fight it.http://finance.yahoo.com/news/republicans-break-ranks-pledge-fight-142146159.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/republicans-break-ranks-pledge-fight-142146159.html)
Called the “Republican Climate Resolution” by supporters, the statement by House members takes about 450 words to mention conservative thought on environmentalism, support for climate science, feared impacts, and a call for economically viable policy. They pledge in general terms to support study and mitigation measures, “using our tradition of American ingenuity, innovation, and exceptionalism.”
...
These bills are interesting in the way that solar energy is, even though solar makes up 1 percent of U.S. power generation. Like solar power, Republican climate bills are noteworthy not because one is likely to pass anytime soon, but because massive external forces—markets, other governments, and climate change itself—may eventually force it into the foreground....
Medical, science research faces huge cuts under Trump budget
It’s important to see Trump's massive budget cut in federally funded research -- eliminating the Energy Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency; slashing the National Institutes of Health; eliminating or drastically cutting research by the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration – for what it really is.https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1507081802637744 (https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1507081802637744)
It’s part of Trump’s war on truth.
Throughout modern history, demagogues and tyrants have attacked scientists, researchers, investigators, analysts, professors, and all other sources of truth, including journalists. Some have even burned books.
That’s because tyrants don’t want independent sources of truth. Truth threatens their power. They want a monopoly on information, in order to keep the public in the dark. The most revolutionary act in a democracy is speaking truth to power, and spreading the truth so that others may speak it as well.
Trump tells big lies, attacks the independent press, and slashes funding for research. Connect the dots.
Robert Reich writes:QuoteIt’s important to see Trump's massive budget cut in federally funded research -- eliminating the Energy Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency; slashing the National Institutes of Health; eliminating or drastically cutting research by the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration – for what it really is.https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1507081802637744 (https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1507081802637744)
It’s part of Trump’s war on truth.
Throughout modern history, demagogues and tyrants have attacked scientists, researchers, investigators, analysts, professors, and all other sources of truth, including journalists. Some have even burned books.
That’s because tyrants don’t want independent sources of truth. Truth threatens their power. They want a monopoly on information, in order to keep the public in the dark. The most revolutionary act in a democracy is speaking truth to power, and spreading the truth so that others may speak it as well.
Trump tells big lies, attacks the independent press, and slashes funding for research. Connect the dots.
My good friend Alice F. has just tweeted @POTUS:
https://twitter.com/AF_Wetware/status/843137734692749313
Any chance of a "retweet" or three?
Now there is an idea. How about organised twitter storms at POTUS on strategically agreed upon data. Being the type of guy he is and with everyone watching his responses I think it would be valuable.
Maybe we could have a thread here - What to tweet POTUS - and all concerned folks can share those items in their other forums and also of course tweet POTUS.
Cheers,
Now there is an idea. How about organised twitter storms at POTUS on strategically agreed upon data
And so it begins; the linked article is entitled: "Bill Would Bar Discrimination Toward Climate Change Doubters"; which could make evidence-based scientists guilty of hate crime if say they were to deny a climate change denying scientist (with research funded by the fossil fuel industry) a tenured position.Well this sort of a bill would be a reason for this thred to be in 'science section. Of course no sensible university would obey this. They really want to dumb down north american citicens. Coal-communism, or fossilic fascism.
http://staging.hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CLIMATE_CHANGE_DISCRIMINATION?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-03-22-19-01-38 (http://staging.hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CLIMATE_CHANGE_DISCRIMINATION?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-03-22-19-01-38)
Curry, Pielke, Christy -- all three superstars of climate denial will appear before the US House Science Committee next week!
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
Lamar Smith comes to bury Michael Mann, not to praise him.
President Trump’s sprawling executive order directing the EPA and other agencies to start dismantling President Obama’s climate legacy flies in the face of law, science, and strong public support for climate action.https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-doniger/trumps-climate-destruction-plan-deal-he-cant-close (https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-doniger/trumps-climate-destruction-plan-deal-he-cant-close)
Trump’s executive order is a Climate Destruction Plan. It attacks the centerpiece of his predecessor’s climate legacy, the Clean Power Plan to limit the carbon pollution from the nation’s existing fleet of power plants.
Trump’s order does not stop there. It tells the EPA to start rolling back carbon limits for new power plants. It directs the EPA and the Bureau of Land Management to begin scrapping curbs on methane leakage from the oil and gas industry.
Today’s order follows earlier steps to start weakening clean car and fuel economy standards. And the order strikes at economic tools for quantifying the benefits of climate protections (the social cost of carbon) and repeals other executive orders and guidelines. ...
As destructive as it aspires to be, however, Trump’s executive order cannot erase Clean Air Act standards and other climate protection rules by itself. Scott Pruitt and the president’s other minions must follow the rule of law. They can tear down these regulations only using the same legal process it took to build them. Their final decisions must pass muster in the courts.
As members of the Mayors National Climate Action Agenda (MNCAA), we represent more than 41 million Americans in 75 cities across our nation — in red and blue states alike. We write to strongly object to your actions to roll back critically important U.S. climate policies including the Clean Power Plan and vehicle fuel efficiency standards, as well as proposed budget cuts to the EPA and critical federal programs like Energy Star....https://medium.com/@ClimateMayors/climatemayors-letter-to-president-trump-on-roll-back-of-us-climate-actions-639389c80f1c
We should no longer be duped into playing along with this strategy.
Despite sending many skilled science communicators to testify at the hearings over the years and even when scoring tactical victories, the strategic effect of participating at these hearings has been to sustain the perception of false equivalence, a perception only exaggerated by the majority’s ability to select a grossly disproportionate number of witnesses far removed from mainstream science (it’s not coincidence that Judith Curry, professor emeritus, Georgia Institute of Technology, and John Christy, professor of atmospheric sciences, University of Alabama at Huntsville, are called upon so often by the Republicans).
A better response would be to simply boycott future hearings of this kind and to call out these hearings for what they are: a tactic to distract the public from a serious policy debate over how to manage both the short- and long-term risks of climate change.
Since January, the surge has transformed into a slow, incessant march of deleting datasets, webpages and policies about the Arctic. I now come to expect a weekly email request to replace invalid citations, hoping that someone had the foresight to download statistics about Arctic permafrost thaw or renewable energy in advance of the purge.
House Science Committee Chair Says Science Magazine Is Not ‘Objective’
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58dbae95e4b0cb23e65d06f5?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009 (http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58dbae95e4b0cb23e65d06f5?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009)Translation:QuoteHouse Science Committee Chair Says Science Magazine Is Not ‘Objective’
Doh!!!
The climate office will probably be closed, but in the meantime, the term "climate change" is banned in all internal communication, according to a Politico source.
Energy Department climate office bans use of phrase ‘climate change’; The Office of International Climate and Clean Energy is the only office at DOE with the words ‘climate’ in its name, and it may be endangered as Trump looks to reorganize government agencies. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/energy-department-climate-change-phrases-banned-236655 (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/energy-department-climate-change-phrases-banned-236655)
Today is All Fools’ Day, but this is no joke.
What on Earth are Rep. Higgins and ex Prof. Curry on about with all this “RICO” business?
"Would you be able to at some future date provide to this committee evidence of your lack of association with the organisation Union of Concerned Scientists and lack of your association with the organisation called Climate Accountability Institute? Can you provide that documentation to this committee Sir?"
You may today be cajoled — through the internet — by none other than oil billionaire, petrostate dictator, former KGB agent, democracy saboteur, and Trump-supporter Vladimir Putin who’d try to use his supposedly legendary charm (or the merciless intimidation of his online agents and surrogates) to convince you of the false notion that the climate is changing but humans aren’t the cause (see — Putin Defends Climate Deniers and Looks Forward to Arctic Melting). If you’re one of those strong-willed enough to wrench your mind from the grasp of a man and his army of 15,000 information warfare trolls spreading misinformation aimed at the advancement of his destructive wealth and power, you could use the same powerful tool to actually directly contact real scientists — who’d tell you that about 100 percent or more of present warming is now being caused by human beings. So you could then give Putin a very justified big, fat middle finger salute.
“New Cold War? Well, maybe even worse,” the Russian President’s spokesman told ABC News.“
Putin calls on the US to join in efforts to save the polar bear and preserve arctic biodiversity.
https://www.rt.com/business/382837-putin-russia-united-states-arctic/ (https://www.rt.com/business/382837-putin-russia-united-states-arctic/)
Why do people insist on calling one of the most popular politicians in modern times a dictator? Have words lost all meaning?
Terry
Because he jails the opposition and protesters ???
Those ex Soviet countries in which he never ran?
Maybe he is popular in Russian. What is the view in the ex Soviet counties?
[/size]
And I will trust they care about the environment when I see how the clean up the most polluted spots in the world in their own territory...
https://sputniknews.com/russia/201704011052197679-russian-arctic-development-third-stage/ (https://sputniknews.com/russia/201704011052197679-russian-arctic-development-third-stage/)
Pretty happy with an iceless Arctic...
Putin calls on the US to join in efforts to save the polar bear and preserve arctic biodiversity.
https://www.rt.com/business/382837-putin-russia-united-states-arctic/ (https://www.rt.com/business/382837-putin-russia-united-states-arctic/)
Why do people insist on calling one of the most popular politicians in modern times a dictator? Have words lost all meaning?
Terry
I take it you mean
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/24/presidential-executive-order-enforcing-regulatory-reform-agenda (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/24/presidential-executive-order-enforcing-regulatory-reform-agenda)
He's putting the bureaucracy in charge of making itself smaller ? I go and watch "Yes, Prime Minister" for a while. Or mebbe he should.
sidd
He is reducing regulatory burdens like mediocre administrators reduce cost. Just cut the budget and let lower employees figure out how to make it work.
When he was elected I though, hey maybe the guy actually has innovative ways to make policies that make the government more efficient. But no. Only mediocre middle management tactics to reduce cost. No innovative policies. No long term changes that make america great again.
Activists planning the People's Climate March in Washington, D.C. on April 29 are mapping out a far more ambitious trek than that day's walk from the Capitol to the White House. They are trying to turn rage over the Trump administration's rollback of climate change policy and budget cuts targeting science into actual political clout.https://insideclimatenews.org/news/18042017/climate-change-peoples-climate-march-environmentalists-donald-trump
...
Climate activists had selected April 29 as a day of mobilization long before they knew that they'd be locked in battle with the Trump administration. Planning began last summer, with People's Climate March organizers hoping to reprise a 2014 protest in New York, when more than 400,000 people took to the streets ahead of a United Nations summit. It was the largest climate march in history. Organizers believe that the outpouring had helped prod President Obama and set the stage for the Paris accord the following year....
WASHINGTON — Dow Chemical is pushing a Trump administration that's open to scrapping regulations to ignore the findings of federal scientists who point to a family of widely used pesticides as harmful to about 1,800 critically threatened or endangered species.http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/dow-chemical-pushes-white-house-kill-risk-study-showing-pesticide-n749396 (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/dow-chemical-pushes-white-house-kill-risk-study-showing-pesticide-n749396)
Lawyers representing Dow, whose CEO is a close adviser to President Donald Trump, and two other manufacturers of organophosphates sent letters last week to the heads of three of Trump's Cabinet agencies. The companies asked them "to set aside" the results of government studies the companies contend are fundamentally flawed....
Register to attend your local march
On April 22, 2017, join us for an unprecedented gathering of people standing together to acknowledge and voice the critical role that science plays in each of our lives.
*If you will be attending virtually, please select Washington DC or your local march and you will be given an option for virtual marching.
To register, all that we require is your name and email address to ensure accurate counts of participants. If you have the time, please share additional details with us. Our insatiable curiosity leaves us with many questions that we want answered — we can only do that with your participation! For more information on our privacy policy, please click here. ...
The Trump administration's assault on scientific evidence and research funding may have triggered the March for Science, but the more than 500 events around the world on Saturday demonstrated that the movement is truly global. ...http://mashable.com/2017/04/22/march-for-science-photos-worldwide/ (http://mashable.com/2017/04/22/march-for-science-photos-worldwide/)
...http://mashable.com/2017/04/22/trump-earth-day-statement-anti-science/ (http://mashable.com/2017/04/22/trump-earth-day-statement-anti-science/)
Along with some faint praise of America's "abundant natural resources and awe-inspiring beauty," Trump used Earth Day to talk about jobs.
"Economic growth enhances environmental protection. We can and must protect our environment without harming America's working families. That is why my administration is reducing unnecessary burdens on American workers and American companies, while being mindful that our actions must also protect the environment," Trump said.
...
After proposing to eliminate the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) in its draft budget, the Trump administration, through the Department of Energy, has started withholding money for grants already approved by the agency, Politico reported Thursday, citing two unidentified sources.https://thinkprogress.org/arpa-e-funding-not-going-through-5da18dccd935
The hold on the money for the grants began last week, Politico reported. During his run for the White House, President Donald Trump promised to target federal funding for agencies, like ARPA-E, that promote clean energy technologies.
...
The Energy Department is reportedly denying funds for already-approved grants
The grant-making ARPA-E program was targeted for elimination in Trump budget.QuoteAfter proposing to eliminate the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) in its draft budget, the Trump administration, through the Department of Energy, has started withholding money for grants already approved by the agency, Politico reported Thursday, citing two unidentified sources.https://thinkprogress.org/arpa-e-funding-not-going-through-5da18dccd935
The hold on the money for the grants began last week, Politico reported. During his run for the White House, President Donald Trump promised to target federal funding for agencies, like ARPA-E, that promote clean energy technologies.
...
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration got an earful Tuesday from people who say federal rules limiting air and water pollution aren't tough enough, even as it was seeking suggestions about what environmental regulations it should gut.https://www.apnews.com/0268b0a422ae496fad051a9720588664 (https://www.apnews.com/0268b0a422ae496fad051a9720588664)
The Environmental Protection Agency held a three-hour "virtual listening session" on Tuesday to collect public comments by phone about which clean water regulations should be targeted for repeal, replacement or modification. The call was part of the agency's response to President Donald Trump's order to get rid of regulations that are burdensome to business and industry.
Both the phone-in session and the nearly 6,000 written comments submitted so far and published on a federal website were dominated by those staunchly opposed to the planned regulatory rollback. Many identified themselves as being affiliated with environmental groups. Others said they were taxpayers worried about maintaining safe sources of drinking water.
"I actually enjoy breathing clean air and drinking clean water and would find it quite burdensome not to," said Emily Key, who identified herself as a citizen worried about what cancer-causing chemicals children may be exposed to.
...
U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has recused himself from several cases that he pursued against the agency as Oklahoma attorney general.https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060054153 (https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060054153)
Pruitt has signed a recusal statement, dated yesterday, which was obtained by E&E News under the Freedom of Information Act. The four-page document lays out several lawsuits pending before the agency that Pruitt has agreed to step away from during his tenure as EPA chief.
"This recusal statement addresses all of my ethics obligations," Pruitt said in the statement.
Pruitt said he would not participate for one year after his Senate confirmation in matters involving certain parties, including the state of Oklahoma and the Rule of Law Defense Fund, a public policy group involving Republican attorneys general that targeted environmental rules.
...
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s response to the Trump administration pulling down its website detailing information about climate change: putting up his own.http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/06/chicago-mayor-rahm-emanuel-posts-epa-deleted-climate-change-page-238067 (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/06/chicago-mayor-rahm-emanuel-posts-epa-deleted-climate-change-page-238067)
The new section of the City of Chicago’s website, launched this weekend, pulls data from the archived Environmental Protection Agency page, noting, “while this information may not be readily available on the agency’s webpage right now, here in Chicago we know climate change is real and we will continue to take action to fight it.” Emanuel is promising to build the site out more in the coming weeks, using city resources.
...
...http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/05/california-farm-workers-just-got-poisoned-nasty-pesticide-greenlghted-trump (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/05/california-farm-workers-just-got-poisoned-nasty-pesticide-greenlghted-trump)
Many public health experts, scientists, and environmentalists have for years been pushing for a ban on chlorpyrifos, and last year it was looking like the Environmental Protection Agency intended to instate one....
But in March, the EPA abruptly changed its stance on chlorpyrifos, greenlighting it instead of banning it. The decision, among the first major ones made by Scott Pruitt in his tenure as EPA chief, caused outrage in public health circles. Dow AgroSciences applauded the decision. ...
Barry Myers, AccuWeather chief executive, emerges as front-runner for NOAA’s top job
"Should Myers be Trump’s choice, he has supporters on Capitol Hill, and appears to be in good standing with the House Science Committee."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/05/15/barry-myers-accuweather-chief-executive-emerges-as-front-runner-for-noaa-top-job/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/05/15/barry-myers-accuweather-chief-executive-emerges-as-front-runner-for-noaa-top-job/)
Not mentioned in the article:
• The House Science Committee is anti-science.
• Accuweather's Joe Bastardi is a big time climate change denier.
Barry Myers, AccuWeather chief executive, emerges as front-runner for NOAA’s top job
"Should Myers be Trump’s choice, he has supporters on Capitol Hill, and appears to be in good standing with the House Science Committee."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/05/15/barry-myers-accuweather-chief-executive-emerges-as-front-runner-for-noaa-top-job/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/05/15/barry-myers-accuweather-chief-executive-emerges-as-front-runner-for-noaa-top-job/)
Not mentioned in the article:
• The House Science Committee is anti-science.
• Accuweather's Joe Bastardi is a big time climate change denier.
What's with The Washington Post. Is this simply bad reporting, or an effort to deceive?
Terry
President Trump looks to nominate Sam Clovis, a former economics professor and conservative talk-radio host, to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s top scientific position.https://medium.com/i-climate-scientists/trumps-nominee-for-usda-chief-scientist-is-not-a-scientist-5c2e16e3c04d
If appointed, Clovis, a climate change denier, would oversee projects ranging from food nutrition to the effects of climate change on crop development. Under the 2008 Farm Bill, this position is supposed to serve as the agency’s “chief scientist” and be chosen “from among distinguished scientists with specialized or significant experience in agricultural research, education, and economics.” Clovis checks one of these boxes. Maybe.
An early advisor to the Trump campaign, Clovis has a master’s in business administration and a doctoral degree in public administration, and appears to have no published scientific or academic work to his name. In fact, Kara McCullough, the recently-crowned Miss USA who holds a Bachelor’s of Science in chemistry, might just be more qualified to lead the office than Clovis....
I was referring to your "not mentioned" items
If you are referring to my "not mentioned" items, I would say: 1) the House Science Committee being anti-science is well known by anyone who follows their actions (thus they may have been employing sarcasm, since WaPo covers Congress quite extensively), and 2) you may need to follow climate scientists on Twitter to know about Joe Bastardi. I know he rants there, I don't know about anywhere else. Or maybe that is not seen as relevant. But WaPo's reporting is normally very highly regarded.
...https://theintercept.com/2017/05/20/congressman-lamar-smith-of-texas-has-a-problem-with-science-and-with-voters/
Smith has always been well liked by the energy industry — he has received more than $700,000 from the oil and gas industry over the course of his career, more than from any other sector — but his newfound power has clearly delighted climate deniers, as evidenced by the hero’s welcome he received when he gave the keynote address at the Heartland Institute’s Climate Conference in March.
Not everyone is pleased with Smith’s successes on behalf of polluting industries. National environmental groups are beginning to target Smith for being “one of the worst climate change deniers in Congress,” as Craig Auster of the League of Conservation Voters described him. And just as he is reaching the height of his power in Washington, Smith is facing a wave of outrage from constituents in Texas that could present the first real challenge for his seat in 30 years....
WASHINGTON— The Center for Biological Diversity today sued the Trump administration to uncover public records showing that federal employees have been censored from using words or phrases related to climate change in formal agency communications.http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2017/climate-change-05-23-2017.php (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2017/climate-change-05-23-2017.php)
Today’s lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., seeks to require four federal agencies to release climate-censorship records, in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act. The Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of the Interior and Department of State have failed to provide records requested by the Center or indicate when they might do so, violating deadlines established under the law.
“The Trump administration’s refusal to release public information about its climate censorship continues a dangerous and illegal pattern of anti-science denial,” said Taylor McKinnon at the Center. “Just as censorship won’t change climate science, foot-dragging and cover-ups won’t be tolerated under the public records law.”
The Center on March 30 filed Freedom of Information Act requests for all directives or communications barring or removing climate-related words or phrases from any formal agency communications. The records requests followed news reports that federal agencies had removed climate information from government websites and instructed Department of Energy staff to avoid using the phrases “climate change,” “emissions reductions” and “Paris agreement.”
The Center has filed identical requests with the Council on Environmental Quality, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
On March 23 the Center joined conservation biologist Stuart Pimm and the Center for Media and Democracy in a separate Freedom of Information Act request to prevent the administration from removing hundreds of environmental data sets on government websites.
Under the Freedom of Information Act, when federal agencies receive requests for the same records three or more times, they must make the records freely available to the public on their websites — a rule known as “the Beetlejuice provision.”
Records responsive to the Center’s climate censorship requests will be made available to the public and the media.
Instead, according to three of the study’s co-authors, the following line was censored from the release: “Global climate change drives sea-level rise, increasing the frequency of coastal flooding.” The significance of the line is underscored by the fact it is the very first line of the study’s abstract. The Post reports that “the decision to change the news release came from officials at the Interior Department itself.”
The other four Earth-science projects to get the ax in the proposed 2018 budget are the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) satellite; the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-3 (OCO-3) experiment; the Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory (CLARREO) Pathfinder; and the Earth-viewing instruments aboard the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) spacecraft.
Trump is basically blinding NASA about climate change. This will be remembered as treason against mankind.
Trump's 2018 Budget Request Axes 5 NASA Earth-Science Missions
http://www.space.com/36989-nasa-budget-cancels-five-earth-science-missions.html (http://www.space.com/36989-nasa-budget-cancels-five-earth-science-missions.html)QuoteThe other four Earth-science projects to get the ax in the proposed 2018 budget are the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) satellite; the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-3 (OCO-3) experiment; the Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory (CLARREO) Pathfinder; and the Earth-viewing instruments aboard the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) spacecraft.
Trump is basically blinding NASA about climate change. This will be remembered as treason against mankind.
Trump's 2018 Budget Request Axes 5 NASA Earth-Science Missions
http://www.space.com/36989-nasa-budget-cancels-five-earth-science-missions.html (http://www.space.com/36989-nasa-budget-cancels-five-earth-science-missions.html)QuoteThe other four Earth-science projects to get the ax in the proposed 2018 budget are the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) satellite; the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-3 (OCO-3) experiment; the Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory (CLARREO) Pathfinder; and the Earth-viewing instruments aboard the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) spacecraft.
He's following in Harper's footsteps, and it was this path that lead to Harper's crushing defeat.
We're hyper aware of denier screeds and may not realize how many potential voters care deeply about environmental issues. The loud, sometimes sponsored voices screaming out against AGW can make it seem a though they are the voice of the majority, but, no matter how many soc puppets one person manipulates, he still controls only one vote.
This budget will force every congress critter to put their name for or against the environment, then face their own constituents.
Bad for the environment, bad for Trump & bad for almost all Republicans. Should make the 2018 election interesting.
Terry
This budget will force every congress critter to put their name for or against the environment, then face their own constituents.
Bad for the environment, bad for Trump & bad for almost all Republicans. Should make the 2018 election interesting.
I like Trump. Finally someone is telling the truth without any stupid political correctness, for example about illegal immigration.
Extract: “For American conservatives, climate change is not fundamentally understood as an environmental, economic or moral issue. Instead, it has become a symbolic front in the culture war that has metastasized in the past couple of decades, touching on every aspect of life, from how we eat to the kind of cars we drive.
…
But American conservatives, including not just Trump but most Republican voters and the vast majority of GOP politicians, see climate change as a phony problem invented by liberals and made up to emasculate white men by making them drive girly little cars.
...”
Bruce
As a Canadian I see "Put America First" as a declaration of economic war. Not a hot war, but war by other means.
Trump drew the lines quite clearly, it's America against the world. While this may resonate in the "Heartland" it sounds, to me at least, like the bellowing of a well armed gambler who, after looking at his hand, demands that we play 4s wild. We may have a 4 in our hand, but that isn't the game we were playing.
Some will continue to play. Some will fold and start a new game without "The Donald". None will be happy.
Is Donald just a belligerent drunk who'll be fine in the morning? Is he a sadist who revels in the pain he causes? Will his successor follow his lead, or is this merely an aberration? Do Donald and Pence represent Twenty First Century America. Is America the country of Bush & Chaney or Obama & Biden?
Each country, every trade block, and all international players are asking these questions. Their answers will vary. Have Americans played fair in the past? in recent years? Have they ever played fair? Is America a good international citizen that follows the rules? When America claims itself to be "The Exception", what are they telling us?
We know that America has the most expensive military in the world, by far, but we know that the Chinese can build a high rise in 15 days. Do these fact matter? How do they matter?
I think that the world is holding it's collective breath. I think the questions above, and more, are being asked, and I think actions based on the answers arrived at are forthcoming.
America is not going quietly into the night. Neither is the rest of the world.
Terry
So I guess the question is, how to more accurately label (tribal) groups.
PS. Many thanks to AbruptSLR and Neven and other posters here. I have been reading ASIB and ASIF almost since the very start of it. Trump is destroying EPA and US climate science, but he is not a conservative to my mind.
... A group of attorneys general is promising a battle against proposed roll back of fuel efficiency standards.
...
pileus wrote:Quote... A group of attorneys general is promising a battle against proposed roll back of fuel efficiency standards.
...
This is so great. Just the threat of taking it to court (plus the attendant publicity, should it happen) will give ICE automakers more pressure to take the switch to EVs seriously.
Jeffrey Bossert Clark, a lawyer who has repeatedly challenged the scientific foundations of U.S. climate policy and was part of a legal team that represented BP in lawsuits stemming from the nation's worst oil spill, the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, was nominated by President Donald Trump on Tuesday to serve as the Justice Department's top environmental lawyer.https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06062017/trump-names-bp-oil-spill-lawyer-climate-policy-foe-top-doj-environment-attorney
...
pileus wrote:Quote... A group of attorneys general is promising a battle against proposed roll back of fuel efficiency standards.
...
This is so great. Just the threat of taking it to court (plus the attendant publicity, should it happen) will give ICE automakers more pressure to take the switch to EVs seriously.
Anybody know where they get the $1655 figure from? I can't find anything that matches it. There was a 2016 study, but it doesn't cite that number anywhere (it's much higher in most cases). The underlying data and assumptions made about cost tech compliance and net vehicle price increases going forward aren't exactly made clear either.
Trump’s misguided move to appease the ever-myopic U.S. auto industry would undo efficiency gains that will provide consumers $98 billion in total net benefits, primarily from reduced fuel use. Individual car buyers would lose “a net savings of $1,650” (even after accounting for the higher vehicle cost) as the EPA concluded in its final January “Determination on the Appropriateness” of the standards....https://thinkprogress.org/trump-fuel-economy-rollback-would-kill-jobs-and-cost-each-car-buyer-1-650-aa2da0479b7d
Currently watching Dept of Energy Secretary Rick "Dancing with the Stars" Perry present on "American Energy DOMINANCE" at the White House press briefing. It is a complete assault on science and reason and, for the lack of a better term, utter bullshit.
I assume this will get a lot of commentary within the climate science community (heads are likely exploding as we speak). I'd encourage you to watch a replay if you can.
While simultaneously declaring the the "science isn't settled" and denigrating scientists, he is inviting a debate and dialogue. Surely there will be many ready to accept this challenge.
Other themes are a new focus on nuclear power and what appears to be a massive expansion of fossil fuels, especially our good friend coal. He is also making references to clean energy, which while welcome, appears to be more a deflection and attempt to distract from what is really a fossil fuel centric strategy.
Ironically, this is likely to create energy on climate change and fuel the resistance even more.
I think that if something like a red vs blue for climate change was done fairly
The House voted 185-234 to defeat Peters’ amendment and keep the study in the bill.http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/341961-house-defeats-amendment-to-strip-climate-study-from-defense-bill (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/341961-house-defeats-amendment-to-strip-climate-study-from-defense-bill)
Forty-six Republicans voted against Perry’s amendment. Two Republicans, Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), argued against it during floor debate earlier Thursday.
The effects of climate change “are drivers of geopolitical instability and degrade the security of the United States.” Stefanik said.
“We would be remiss in our efforts to protect our national security to not fully account for the risk climate change poses to our bases, our readiness and to the fulfillment of our armed services mission.”
I know it's easy to post images of idiots behaving badly, but for crying out loud.
<snip>
it does not note that the AGGI uses a GWP100 of 25 for methane (which is actually over 35).
Its bad enough that the AGGI is going up at 3-4ppm per year this decade, much faster than just CO2, I didn't know that they were also underestimating the methane GWP100 by 40% (with a GWP100 of 35 we would be well past the 500ppm CO2e level [about 520?], maybe that's why they are still using 25?)
I would have thought that the use of a GWP20 would be very instructive, given the short-lived nature of methane in the atmosphere and concerns about triggering feedbacks in the short term.
In April, Perry launched the grid study with an eye to examining whether policies that favor wind and solar energy are accelerating the retirement of coal and nuclear plants critical to ensuring reliable power supplies. With President Donald Trump pledging to reverse regulations that have harmed coal, the study was viewed by critics as a way the administration would justify curtailing the surging expansion of wind and solar power and provide help to coal plants.https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-14/renewable-energy-not-a-threat-to-grid-draft-of-u-s-study-finds (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-14/renewable-energy-not-a-threat-to-grid-draft-of-u-s-study-finds)
But the draft report concludes: "Grid operators are using technologies, standards and practices to assure that they can continue operating the grid reliably."
...
The career officials at the department found that energy efficiency, battery storage and demand response were helping the reliability of the grid, changing it from the way it had operated in the past, but not endangering the provision of electricity, the May draft showed.
...
The Trump administration is angling to use a United Nations climate change adaptation fund to pay for the construction of coal plants instead, Bloomberg News reports.
An official told Bloomberg that the White House is pushing to use the Green Climate Fund, which the U.S. has contributed $1 billion to, for more "clean coal" power plants around the world.
The Green Climate Fund is a U.N. effort designed to send contributions from rich countries to developing nations who are bracing for the worst impact of climate change.
Some of the programs the GCF has funded include hydropower projects in the Solomon Islands and Tajikistan and a renewable energy push in Egypt. A Trump official told Bloomberg the U.S. would push to spend future money on “clean coal” and other power plants that aim to produce fewer carbon emissions than existing power facilities.
One of President Trump’s main complaints about the Paris climate agreement was the $3 billion pledge the Trump administration made to the GCF. Former President Barack Obama was able to contribute $1 billion before he left office earlier this year, and Trump has said the U.S. will stop future payments to the fund.
But the U.S. still has a seat on the GCF’s board by virtue of its previous contributions. The GCF funds projects on a consensus basis, making it more difficult for the U.S. to push a coal project through without buy-in from other nations.
President Trump promised to grow jobs by rolling back Obama-era energy and pollution rules. And he’s fulfilling his pledge, but not how he intended. In just six months, Trump’s policies have resulted in a surge in employment — for environmental lawyers.http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article161071669.html (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article161071669.html)
Since Trump took office, environmental groups and Democratic state attorneys general have filed more than four dozen lawsuits challenging his executive orders and decisions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Interior Department and other agencies. Environmental organizations are hiring extra lawyers. Federal agencies are requesting bigger legal defense budgets.
The first round of legal skirmishes has mostly gone to the environmentalists. Earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit blocked the administration from delaying Obama-era rules aimed at reducing oil industry releases of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. On June 14, a federal judge ruled against permits issued to complete construction of the Dakota Access pipeline, a partial victory for the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, which claims its hunting and fishing grounds are threatened by the oil pipeline.
...
Democratic attorneys general are now ramping up their own fundraising and are filing or joining in suits against Trump’s environmental, immigration and education policies. AGs such as California’s Xavier Becerra, Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro and Washington state’s Bob Ferguson are all raising their profiles with these lawsuits. All are seen as contenders for future seats as governor or U.S. senator.
...
Trump aims to use UN climate fund for coal plantsI'm guessing the bolded should read Obama administration?QuoteThe Trump administration is angling to use a United Nations climate change adaptation fund to pay for the construction of coal plants instead, Bloomberg News reports.
An official told Bloomberg that the White House is pushing to use the Green Climate Fund, which the U.S. has contributed $1 billion to, for more "clean coal" power plants around the world.
The Green Climate Fund is a U.N. effort designed to send contributions from rich countries to developing nations who are bracing for the worst impact of climate change.
Some of the programs the GCF has funded include hydropower projects in the Solomon Islands and Tajikistan and a renewable energy push in Egypt. A Trump official told Bloomberg the U.S. would push to spend future money on “clean coal” and other power plants that aim to produce fewer carbon emissions than existing power facilities.
One of President Trump’s main complaints about the Paris climate agreement was the $3 billion pledge the Trump administration made to the GCF. Former President Barack Obama was able to contribute $1 billion before he left office earlier this year, and Trump has said the U.S. will stop future payments to the fund.
But the U.S. still has a seat on the GCF’s board by virtue of its previous contributions. The GCF funds projects on a consensus basis, making it more difficult for the U.S. to push a coal project through without buy-in from other nations.
Climate change skeptics claim that the science is unsettled while simultaneously proposing to end studies that would settle it. This posture would be ironic and slightly amusing if it wasn't so flagrantly dangerous to the future of human civilization on Earth.http://theweek.com/articles/712207/donald-trumps-10-trillion-climate-mistake (http://theweek.com/articles/712207/donald-trumps-10-trillion-climate-mistake)
The latest iteration of this ludicrous hypocrisy was on full display last week when the House appropriations committee carved another $50 million from NASA's Earth science division, on top of the already severe 2018 cuts requested by the Trump administration. If eventually endorsed by Congress, the reductions will leave Earth scientists unable to fill gaps in data considered crucial to understanding the state of the planet, thus perpetuating the "unsettled science" that deniers profess to abhor....
Taurel said that funding for green energy, preparing for the effects of climate change and stopping offshore drilling are three policy areas where moderate Republicans could join Democrats, but that more Republicans must speak about ways to reduce carbon emissions.http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article161467618.html (http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article161467618.html)
“This is called the Climate Solutions Caucus, so that’s the key kind of yardstick they should be measured by,” Taurel said. “To what extent are they supporting solutions to climate change?”
Curbelo argues he’s doing his part by urging his colleagues to buck conservatives in Congress.
“I assume that now when we get into appropriations season there will be many amendments where I assume our group is going to be critical to blocking bad policy,” Curbelo said last month.
I am not a member of the deep state. I am not big government.
I am a scientist, a policy expert, a civil servant and a worried citizen. Reluctantly, as of today, I am also a whistleblower on an administration that chooses silence over science.
Nearly seven years ago, I came to work for the Interior Department, where, among other things, I’ve helped endangered communities in Alaska prepare for and adapt to a changing climate. But on June 15, I was one of about 50 senior department employees who received letters informing us of involuntary reassignments. Citing a need to “improve talent development, mission delivery and collaboration,” the letter informed me that I was reassigned to an unrelated job in the accounting office that collects royalty checks from fossil fuel companies.
Eric Holthaus: Whoa. France just launched makeourplanetgreatagain.fr and is offering grants of up to 1.5 million Euro for climate scientists to move there.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ericholthaus/status/873229691385020416 (https://mobile.twitter.com/ericholthaus/status/873229691385020416)
Hundreds of climate scientists, including many from the United States, have applied to work in France under a €60-million (US$69-million) scheme set up by the country's president, Emmanuel Macron, after his US counterpart Donald Trump rejected the Paris accord on global warming. And Germany has announced that it will set up a similar programme to lure researchers.https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-017-01713-4 (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-017-01713-4)
Macron launched his ‘Make Our Planet Great Again’ initiative on 8 June, seeking to entice researchers in other countries to France with offers of 4-year grants worth up to €1.5 million. Six weeks on, the programme has been flooded with applicants, says Anne Peyroche, a biologist and the chief research officer of the CNRS, France’s national basic-research agency.
...
Clovis, an early advisor to the Trump campaign, has a master's in business administration and a doctoral degree in public administration, and appears to have no published scientific or academic work to his name. The position he is nominated for, which is tasked to provide scientific direction and uphold "scientific integrity" at the USDA, has previously been held by distinguished scientists with deep expertise in certain issue areas.https://www.ecowatch.com/sam-clovis-usda-2462483880.html (https://www.ecowatch.com/sam-clovis-usda-2462483880.html)
In a 2014 interview, Clovis called evidence of climate change "junk science," claiming that he has "enough of a science background to know when I'm being boofed."
“Also, as the Earth warms, we are seeing beneficial changes to the earth’s geography,” he writes. “For instance, Arctic sea ice is decreasing. This development will create new commercial shipping lanes that provide faster, more convenient, and less costly routes between ports in Asia, Europe, and eastern North America. This will increase international trade and strengthen the world economy.”Such a brazen [and slippery smooth] segue by Smith, from the hard denial of warming to the denial of consequences. Evidence [as if any was needed] of the expediency of the whole movement. It'll be interesting to see whether the reality of warming is even debated in the Red-Team / Blue-Team show, or simply ignored, a sacrificial part of the argument, that has outlived its usefulness.
Donald Trump’s secretary of energy, Rick Perry, once campaigned to abolish the $30 billion agency that he now runs, which oversees everything from our nuclear arsenal to the electrical grid. The department’s budget is now on the chopping block. But does anyone in the White House really understand what the Department of Energy actually does? And what a horrible risk it would be to ignore its extraordinary, life-or-death responsibilities?
"It's been six months, and people are still crying at their desks."
Scott Pruitt's Crimes Against Nature
Trump's EPA chief is gutting the agency, defunding science and serving the fossil-fuel industry
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/scott-pruitt-is-gutting-the-epa-serving-fossil-fuel-industry-w494156 (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/scott-pruitt-is-gutting-the-epa-serving-fossil-fuel-industry-w494156)
The U.S. House of Representatives brushed aside Democrats' efforts to preserve federal funding for clean energy and energy efficiency as it voted to approve a large spending bill Thursday that would slash those programs by 45 percent while maintaining federal support for fossil energy research and development.https://insideclimatenews.org/news/27072017/congress-budget-house-vote-renewable-energy-efficiency-programs-fossil-fuel-spending
A top Environmental Protection Agency official resigned Tuesday in protest of the direction the EPA has taken under President Trump.http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/energy-environment/344825-top-epa-official-resigns-over-direction-of-agency-under (http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/energy-environment/344825-top-epa-official-resigns-over-direction-of-agency-under)
Elizabeth "Betsy" Southerland ended her 30-year run at the agency with a scathing exit letter in which she claimed that "the environmental field is suffering from the temporary triumph of myth over truth." She last worked as the director of science and technology in the Office of Water.
"The truth is there is NO war on coal, there is NO economic crisis caused by environmental protection, and climate change IS caused by man's activities," Southerland wrote, directly rejecting many of Trump's claims.
Southerland said that since EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt took over the agency, dozens of regulations designed to protect the environment had been repealed, and Trump's proposed budget cuts to the agency would devastate its ability to enforce existing protections and create new ones.
She took aim in particular at Trump's demand that two federal regulations be struck from the books for every new one added.
"Should EPA repeal two existing rules protecting infants from neurotoxins in order to promulgate a new rule protecting adults from a newly discovered liver toxin?" she wrote. "Faced with such painful choices, the best possible outcome for the American people would be regulatory paralysis where no new rules are released so that existing protections remain in place." ...
The US government’s withdrawal from dealing with, or even acknowledging, climate change may have provoked widespread opprobrium, but for Alaskan communities at risk of toppling into the sea, the risks are rather more personal.https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/10/alaska-coastal-towns-sea-level-rise-climate-change
The Trump administration has moved to dismantle climate adaptation programs including the Denali Commission, an Anchorage-based agency that is crafting a plan to safeguard or relocate dozens of towns at risk from rising sea levels, storms and the winnowing away of sea ice.
Federal assistance for these towns has been ponderous but could now grind to a halt, with even those working on the issue seemingly targeted by the administration. In July, Joel Clement, an interior department official who worked with Alaskan communities on climate adaptation, claimed he had been moved to a completely unrelated position because of the administration’s ideological hostility to the issue.
“We were getting down to the brass tacks of relocation [of towns at risk] and now work has just stopped,” Clement told the Guardian. He has lodged an official complaint over his reassignment.
“Without federal coordination from Washington DC, there isn’t much hope. This will take millions of dollars and will take years, and these people don’t have years. I think it’s clear I was moved because of my climate work. It feels like a complete abdication of responsibility on climate change.”
According to the Army Corps of Engineers, 31 Alaskan communities face “imminent” existential threats from coastline erosion, flooding and other consequences of temperatures that are rising twice as quickly in the state as the global average. A handful – Kivalina, Newtok, Shishmaref and Shaktoolik – are considered in particularly perilous positions and will need to be moved. ...
WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency says it plans to scrap an Obama-era measure limiting water pollution from coal-fired power plants.http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/epa-plans-rewrite-obama-era-limits-coal-power-plant-wastewater/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/epa-plans-rewrite-obama-era-limits-coal-power-plant-wastewater/)
A letter from EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt released Monday as part of a legal appeal said he will seek to revise the 2015 guidelines mandating increased treatment for wastewater from steam electric power-generating plants.
Acting at the behest of electric utilities who opposed the stricter standards, Pruitt first moved in April to delay implementation of the new guidelines. The wastewater flushed from the coal-fired plants into rivers and lakes typically contains traces of such highly toxic heavy metals as lead, arsenic, mercury and selenium. ...
Multiple researchers who received grants from the US Department of Energy (DOE) have been asked to remove references to “climate change” and “global warming” from the descriptions of their projects.
Reject This Incompetent Trump Nominee; He's Not A Scientist
President Trump has nominated a non-scientist to be the chief scientist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This is an outrageous slap in the face to science. It's also a slap in the face to Congress.
As I predicted back in May, Trump has tapped Sam Clovis, a former right-wing radio talk-show host and failed Senate candidate from Iowa. ProPublica, revealing the expected pick, noted that Clovis was a vocal climate change denier. Clovis has an undergraduate degree in politics and graduate training in business, but he has no formal training in science at all.
Clovis does have one qualification, though. As ProPublica pointed out, he has been a "fiery pro-Trump advocate on television." Sounds like a good candidate for a chief scientist job to me.
Fortunately (perhaps), the Senate has to approve this appointment. The Senate itself stipulated, in a bill that Congress passed in 2008, that the USDA's chief scientist (the under secretary for research, education and economics) must be appointed from among "distinguished scientists with specialized or significant experience in agricultural research, education and economics."
The law also says, just to make it crystal clear, that the under secretary "shall hold the title of chief scientist of the department."
Why is this appointment so wrong? I'll repeat what I wrote back in May:
Overseeing the USDA's research programs requires strong expertise in biological science. A non-scientist has no basis for deciding which research is going well or which questions present the most promising avenues for research. A non-scientist is simply incompetent to choose among them – and I mean this in the literal sense of the word, i.e., not having the knowledge or training to do the job. This does not mean that I think Sam Clovis is incompetent at other things; I don't know him, and he might be very capable in other areas. A non-scientist leader of a scientific agency will be incapable of using scientific expertise to set priorities and instead can make up his own priorities.
If the Senate has any backbone at all – if Republicans are willing to show that they are capable of doing something other than rubber-stamping every action of our self-absorbed, ignorant president, no matter how damaging – then they will turn down this nomination. Sam Clovis is so obviously unqualified that this should be easy to do.
Actually, if Clovis cared about the USDA's mission, he would recognize that he's the wrong man for the job and refuse the nomination. Even Dan Glickman, a former secretary of agriculture, said, "I wouldn't be qualified for that job," referring to himself (he's a lawyer), in a recent interview about Clovis' appointment. The current and previous chief scientists at the USDA have Ph.D.s and extensive scientific publication records. Clovis does not. (Note that when I wrote to Clovis in May to ask about his potential nomination, he declined to respond on the record.)
Steven Salzberg is the Bloomberg Distinguished Professor of Biomedical Engineering, Computer Science, and Biostatistics at Johns Hopkins University.
...https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/politics/wp/2017/09/07/at-a-moment-climate-change-is-hard-to-ignore-the-epa-is-being-pointed-elsewhere/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/politics/wp/2017/09/07/at-a-moment-climate-change-is-hard-to-ignore-the-epa-is-being-pointed-elsewhere/)
Once Jan. 20 rolled around, though, the EPA was upended. President Trump nominated Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt to run the agency, a man who had repeatedly sued the EPA in an effort to block its regulations targeting the oil and gas industry in his state. In an interview in March, Pruitt denied the scientific consensus that human activity was driving the warmer climate — a denial that suggested he would curtail the EPA's efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
Once confirmed by the Senate, Pruitt got to work reshaping the agency in precisely that way. In April, the organization's page on climate change was removed; in May, a page focused on educating children was as well. Pruitt's the driver of a government-wide effort to question climate science by positioning it against the views of the business community. Even the EPA museum may be overhauled to play down climate change.
...
At a moment climate change is hard to ignore, the EPA is being pointed elsewhere.Pruitt even denies CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The new head of the Environmental Protection Agency said on Thursday he is not convinced that carbon dioxide from human activity is the main driver of climate change and said he wants Congress to weigh in on whether CO2 is a harmful pollutant that should be regulated.https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/epa-chief-pruitt-refuses-to-link-co2-and-global-warming/ (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/epa-chief-pruitt-refuses-to-link-co2-and-global-warming/)
You’ll have heard that line of argument about cancer scientists, right?https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2017/sep/15/the-idea-that-climate-scientists-are-in-it-for-the-cash-has-deep-ideological-roots (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2017/sep/15/the-idea-that-climate-scientists-are-in-it-for-the-cash-has-deep-ideological-roots)
The one where they’re just in it for the government grant money and that they don’t really want to find a cure, because if they did they’d be out of a job?
No, of course you haven’t. That’s because it’s ridiculous and a bit, well, vomit-inducing.
To make such an argument, you would need to be deeply cynical about people’s motives for consistently putting their own pay packets above the welfare of millions of people.
You would have to think that scientists were not motivated to help their fellow human beings, but instead were driven only by self-interest.
Suggesting that climate scientists are pushing a line about global warming because their salaries depend on it is a popular talking point that deniers love to throw around.
But why do so many “sceptics”, particularly those who form part of the organised machinery of climate science denial, feel comfortable in accusing climate scientists of only being in it for the money?
Duke University history professor Nancy MacLean suggests some answers in her new book Democracy in Chains: the Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for America.
The book documents how wealthy conservatives, in particular petrochemical billionaire Charles Koch, teamed up with neoliberal academics with the objective, MacLean says, of undermining the functions of government in the United States. ...
As NOAA administrator, Myers would be in charge of the Weather Service whose data are heavily used by his family business, based in State College, Pa.https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/10/12/trump-taps-barry-myers-accuweather-ceo-to-head-noaa-choice-seen-as-controversial/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/10/12/trump-taps-barry-myers-accuweather-ceo-to-head-noaa-choice-seen-as-controversial/)
AccuWeather has, in the past, supported measures to limit the extent to which the Weather Service can release information to the public, so that private companies could generate their own value-added products using this same information. In 2005, for example, Myers and his brother Joel gave money to then-Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), who introduced legislation aimed at curtailing government competition with private weather services.
“Barry Myers defines ‘conflict of interest,'” said Ciaran Clayton, who was communications director at NOAA in the Obama administration. “He actively lobbied to privatize the National Weather Service, which works day in and day out to protect the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans, to benefit his own company’s bottom line.”
Myers’s appointment is strongly opposed by the labor union for the National Weather Service, the NWS Employees Organization, for this reason. “As NOAA administrator, he would be in a position to fundamentally alter the nature of weather services that NOAA provides the nation, to the benefit of his family-owned business,” said Richard Hirn, a spokesperson for the union. ...
Nominee has a business background, not weather. Or science.
President Trump has nominated Accuweather CEO Barry Myers to post of NOAA Administrator.
… and my response, (written in 2013) when Accuwx started selling snake oil 45-day weather forecasts.
President Donald Trump named Kathleen Hartnett White, a hard-line critic of climate change science, to the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality late Thursday night.https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kathleen-hartnett-white-coal-slavery_us_59e0c0b2e4b04d1d518125a9 (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kathleen-hartnett-white-coal-slavery_us_59e0c0b2e4b04d1d518125a9)
Hartnett White is a former Texas environmental regulator whose six-year tenure was marked by her vote to greenlight a new coal-fired plant over the objections of 24 Dallas-area cities and counties. She previously led the Armstrong Center for Energy & the Environment at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, an influential right-wing think tank with ties to Energy Secretary Rick Perry. ...
You have to wonder how an administration selected by the rejection of facts [climate change deniers, birthers, conspiracy theorists] can actually govern. I guess it depends on whether they’re continuous or discontinuous contrarians. If they’re discontinuous, then at least the ones who believe the truth in one field can cover for the others who choose not to, like the apocryphal monks, feeding each other with long-handled spoons. The weakness is climate science. None of them seems to believe in that.I think most of them agree that government is bad. And done the way they do it, it is.
Efficient markets also depend on real information. These people are just picking different winners. Overwhelmingly, the fossil fuel industry.You have to wonder how an administration selected by the rejection of facts [climate change deniers, birthers, conspiracy theorists] can actually govern. I guess it depends on whether they’re continuous or discontinuous contrarians. If they’re discontinuous, then at least the ones who believe the truth in one field can cover for the others who choose not to, like the apocryphal monks, feeding each other with long-handled spoons. The weakness is climate science. None of them seems to believe in that.I think most of them agree that government is bad. And done the way they do it, it is.
Terry
Ariel Dorfman provides a useful list of ways Trump and his administration are shortening the lives of Americans:https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1734421803237075 (https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1734421803237075)
1. An estimated 2.3 million American construction workers, miners, and road-crew laborers face life-threatening injury and illness because the Occupational Health and Safety Administration has delayed the enforcement of rules protecting them from silica dust, which is incontrovertibly linked to increases in cancer and lung disease.
2. Deaths will rise among those who toil in shipyards and on construction sites because a regulation created by the Obama administration to reduce exposure to the carcinogen beryllium has been reversed.
3. Miners are at greater risk because inspections in coal mines to identify hazards have been curtailed.
4. Families in Appalachia will be further endangered because the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have been ordered to stop studying how pollutants produced by mountaintop-removal mining may lead to increased rates of cancer, birth defects and respiratory disease.
5. The lives of millions will be shortened because more than 30 rules safeguarding Americans from pollution have been rolled back: they will slowly die from increased heavy metal effluents in waterways; they will die if emission standards for vehicles are relaxed; they will die because chemical spills will be more frequent and our water, air, and soil less clean.
6. More children will get ill and die if parents opt out of immunization programs encouraged by the president’s reckless promotion of the completely debunked “theory” about a link between vaccination and autism, a belief seconded by Tom Price, until recently the head of Health and Human Services, who once said that “vaccines are the equivalent of human experimentation.”
7. In addition, millions more will die prematurely because Trump by executive order has cut health insurance subsidies by $7 billion – thereby forcing insurers to raise premiums or co-payments, and making insurance unaffordable. And he is allowing insurers to offer fewer benefits, which will harm people with pre-existing health problems.
8. And a large number of children will lack the health coverage they need if the Children's Health Insurance Program runs out of money, which is soon to happen.
We are the richest nation in the world, and richer than we've ever been. This is barbaric.
What do you think?
New Mexico’s public education agency announced late Tuesday that it would restore references to evolution, global warming, and the age of the Earth that had been stripped out of the state’s proposed science education standards. The reversal comes after an outcry by teachers, scientists, students, and others—the culmination of which was a day-long public hearing on Monday in which scores of people spoke out against the draft standards. ...http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/10/new-mexico-reversal-science-education-standards-climate-change/
Apparently violent weather driven by AGW is not the problem. Knowledge of such things is.
Here's more of the same; only industry reps allowed: Pruitt Bars Some Scientists From Advising E.P.A. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/climate/pruitt-epa-science-advisory-boards.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/climate/pruitt-epa-science-advisory-boards.html)
Of course, moneygrubbing is fine, but expertise is not welcome.
Of the 17 new members expected to be appointed to the EPA’s Scientific Advisory Board (SAB), three hail from large fossil-fuel companies: Southern Company, Phillips 66, and Total. Three are from red-state governments; one is from a chemical industry trade association; the rest are from various universities and consulting groups. Five of the 17 hold views on air pollution that are outside of the scientific mainstream. Of the three new members expected to be appointed to the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Council (CASAC), one is an air pollution skeptic.
... Phalen has argued that the air is currently too clean, because children’s lungs need to breathe irritants in order to learn how to fight them. “Modern air,” he said in 2012, “is a little too clean for optimum health.”https://newrepublic.com/article/145582/scott-pruitt-declares-war-air-pollution-science
Trump, it seems, is but following the wishes of the Republican Party. It's convenient to place the blame on him, but allows the perpetrators a free ride.I so agree, Trump is merely the enabler. The next agency to cripple is NASA -
Terry
How about melting Arctic ice? Nope; Congress is dismantling a satellite that was supposed to update the aging monitor network. Climate change? Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, doesn’t think human beings cause it and, more importantly, doesn’t really think you can measure anything to find out. The weather? Forget it; the National Weather Service is coming apart at the seams. How many people live in the United States, data critical to determining political representation and funding priorities? Yeah, no—the 2020 Census is shaping up to be an epic disaster.
It’s hard to imagine a good argument for knowing less—about anything, really, but especially about difficult problems with profound policy implications. The government is supposed to base policy on the best data possible, along with political concerns, budget concerns, social priorities ... the usual warp and weft of running a country.
Yet the Trump administration is running in the other direction. Any data that has even the faintest whiff of potential contradiction goes right out the window. Of course, these folks aren't the first people in power to succumb to a fear of data. They do, however, seem to have found a profound expertise in the practice of eliminating it. Dataphobia chills them to the bone, I suspect because they hope to undermine not only some truths but all truth. David Roberts at Vox has written about what he calls an epistemic crisis in America, the idea that certain rulers and rich people hope to take away the basic idea of knowledge. If nobody can know anything, why bother to try to regulate anything? It’s government-by-ignorance—a shrugocracy.
Assaults on data have come before. “It’s the same reason an oil company doesn’t want research on climate change or a tobacco company doesn’t want research on the relationship between tobacco and cancer,” Vernick says. “Maybe they argue those researchers have an agenda and that’ll allow them to cook the books, but that’s an absurd argument. The worst thing you can do is cook the books. That is the way to guarantee the science is not used as part of policymaking.”
WASHINGTON — EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said a newly released government report that lays most of the blame for the rise of global temperatures to human activity won't deter him from continuing to roll back the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, a major rule aimed at combating climate change.https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/11/08/pruitt-says-alarming-climate-report-not-deter-replacement-clean-power-plan/839857001/
"We’re taking the very necessary step to evaluate our authority under the Clean Air Act and we’ll take steps that are required to issue a subsequent rule. That’s our focus," Pruitt said in an interview with USA TODAY Tuesday. "Does this report have any bearing on that? No it doesn’t. It doesn’t impact the withdrawal and it doesn’t impact the replacement." ...
A Senate committee voted Wednesday to approve President Trump’s highly contentious nominee to lead NASA. The decision to advance Rep. Jim Bridenstine's (R-Okla.) nomination came down to a party-line 14-13 vote in the Senate Commerce Committee.http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/359356-senate-panel-advances-trumps-controversial-nasa-nominee
Democrats strongly objected to Bridenstine, labeling him a politically polarizing figure with little scientific or technical expertise. They also objected to his skepticism of climate change science and his past statements on homosexuality and LGBT rights.
“The NASA administrator, in my judgment, ought to be a skilled executive capable of managing a portfolio of many of the most challenging technical projects undertaken by humankind, especially at this point, as we are venturing out into the cosmos,” Sen. Bill Nelson (Fla.), the top Democrat on the committee, said before senators voted on Bridenstine.
“The NASA administrator must have a strong scientific and a technical background, and the NASA administrator must not be political,” he continued. “I believe, Mr. Chairman, that the nominee falls short.”
No Republicans spoke in favor of Bridenstine at the short Wednesday committee meeting.
...
Bridenstine will now be up for a vote by the whole Senate when Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) schedules it.
Here’s Trump’s pick for Top Environmental Advisor answering questions about the environment in a confirmation hearing. Or, trying to. ::) Unbelievable!Wow, just Wow!
(Senator Whitehouse continually gives speeches on the floor of the Senate, warning about climate change.)
https://twitter.com/adamparkhomenko/status/929598544171945984 (https://twitter.com/adamparkhomenko/status/929598544171945984)
Thats interesting: fossil energy budget at DOE cut by 45% since 2016 ? Is that an error or are they sneaking the money back in somehow ?
Secure, affordable and environmentally acceptable energy sources are
essential to the Nation’s security and economic prosperity. The Fossil
Energy Research and Development (FER&D) program leads Federal research,
development, and demonstration efforts on advanced carbon
capture, and storage (CCS) technologies to facilitate achievement of the
President’s climate goals. FER&D also develops technological solutions
for the prudent and sustainable development of our unconventional domestic
resources.
Two Republican senators have announced they oppose President Donald Trump's controversial pick to become the nation's top regulator of toxic chemicals, putting his nomination in serious jeopardy.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/gop-opposition-endangers-trump-s-pick-regulate-toxic-chemicals-n821416
...
Dourson has elicited a fierce backlash from Democrats and public-health advocates for his long record of industry-funded research, which chemical manufacturers have used to downplay the risks of potentially hazardous substances. ...
Maybe, just maybe, they won't put this industry shill in charge of regulating his own industry?
GOP opposition endangers Trump’s pick to regulate toxic chemicalsQuoteTwo Republican senators have announced they oppose President Donald Trump's controversial pick to become the nation's top regulator of toxic chemicals, putting his nomination in serious jeopardy.
...
Dourson has elicited a fierce backlash from Democrats and public-health advocates for his long record of industry-funded research, which chemical manufacturers have used to downplay the risks of potentially hazardous substances. ...
Thats interesting: fossil energy budget at DOE cut by 45% since 2016 ? Is that an error or are they sneaking the money back in somehow ?
The bulk of dollars that got cut in the "fossil energy" section is in "Fossil Energy Research and Development".
Here is an overview of that program :
https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/04/f0/14_Budget_Brief.pdfQuoteSecure, affordable and environmentally acceptable energy sources are
essential to the Nation’s security and economic prosperity. The Fossil
Energy Research and Development (FER&D) program leads Federal research,
development, and demonstration efforts on advanced carbon
capture, and storage (CCS) technologies to facilitate achievement of the
President’s climate goals. FER&D also develops technological solutions
for the prudent and sustainable development of our unconventional domestic
resources.
So we are mainly looking at the Trump administration killing off CCS technology.
Overall, the biggest looser in this budget is "Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy" which got cut by far the largest amount ($1.4 billion; a whopping -69%).
WASHINGTON (AP) — When it comes to filling jobs dealing with complex science, environment and health issues, the Trump administration is nominating people with fewer science academic credentials than their Obama predecessors. And it’s moving slower as well.https://apnews.com/fc357285cc2d491abfa5cc0d817603ba/Trump-science-job-nominees-missing-advanced-science-degrees
Of 43 Trump administration nominees in science-related positions — including two for Health and Human Services secretary — almost 60 percent did not have a master’s degree or a doctorate in a science or health field, according to an Associated Press analysis. For their immediate predecessors in the Obama administration, it was almost the opposite: more than 60 percent had advanced science degrees.
Pruitt met with the mining group in April and reportedly urged association members to tell President Trump to pull the United States out of the Paris climate deal.http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/363586-epa-watchdog-to-investigate-pruitt-meeting-with-industry-group
Critics of the meeting, including Democrats and liberal groups, say a request like that from a Cabinet member violates anti-lobbying laws for government officials. They want the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to provide a legal opinion on that question, and they asked the inspector general to first “develop a comprehensive factual record" for use in such an analysis. ...
Sixteen-term Republican Lamar Smith has used his power as chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee for the past five years to do battle on behalf of the fossil fuel industry. Embracing the arguments of a small group of climate contrarians, Smith acknowledges that warming is happening but says more research is needed to determine the amount and causes, and whether it does more good than harm. ...https://insideclimatenews.org/news/05122017/lamar-smith-congress-climate-change-fossil-fuel-industry-house-science-committee
Eighteen climate scientists from the US and elsewhere have hit the jackpot as France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, awarded them millions of euros in grants to relocate to France for the rest of Donald Trump’s presidential term.
EPA chemical safety nominee Michael Dourson, who has ties to the chemical industry and writes “science-Bible stories," has just withdrawn his nomination. He’s at least the 39th Trump nominee to drop out of consideration for federal government positions. ...https://www.buzzfeed.com/zahrahirji/michael-dourson-withdraws-epa-chemical-safety
President Donald Trump is considering weakening a regulation intended to protect the health of one of the demographics he has often claimed to care most about — America's coal miners.https://www.salon.com/2017/12/15/the-coal-miners-president-trump-moves-to-weaken-black-lung-protections/
A notice labeled "Regulatory Reform of Existing Standards and Regulations; Retrospective Study of Respirable Coal Mine Dust Rule" was published on Thursday by the White House for the Labor Department’s Mine Safety and Health Administration, according to the Charleston Gazette-Mail. The stated purpose of the reevaluation would be to determine how a 2014 rule passed under President Barack Obama regulating coal miners' exposure to coal dust "could be improved or made more effective or less burdensome."
When the rule was first implemented, it utilized new technologies and increased sampling in mines so that workers would have real-time information about dust levels. This would in turn allow both the miners and operators to minimize the chances that workers would be overexposed to coal dust, which has caused an epidemic of black lung disease among coal miners. ...
The Trump administration is prohibiting officials at the nation’s top public health agency from using a list of seven words or phrases — including “fetus” and “transgender” — in any official documents being prepared for next year’s budget.More detail at the link. Sigh.
Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of the list of forbidden words at a meeting Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee the budget, according to an analyst who took part in the 90-minute briefing. The forbidden words are “vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” “transgender,” “fetus,” “evidence-based” and “science-based.”
After the huge Democratic swing in recent state elections, Republicans in Congress may be evaluating the possible effects on their own re-election chances, given their abominable choices for some administration positions.His falling be the wayside won't be mourned by many.
Another Trump Nominee Drops OutQuoteEPA chemical safety nominee Michael Dourson, who has ties to the chemical industry and writes “science-Bible stories," has just withdrawn his nomination. He’s at least the 39th Trump nominee to drop out of consideration for federal government positions. ...https://www.buzzfeed.com/zahrahirji/michael-dourson-withdraws-epa-chemical-safety (https://www.buzzfeed.com/zahrahirji/michael-dourson-withdraws-epa-chemical-safety)
“Since Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt took over the top job at the agency in March, more than 700 employees have either retired, taken voluntary buyouts, or quit, signaling the second-highest exodus of employees from the agency in nearly a decade.”
More than 700 employees have left the EPA since Scott Pruitt took over
https://thinkprogress.org/epa-employees-leaving-under-pruitt-11b36a220062/
U.S. leadership is indispensable to countering an anti-growth energy agenda that is detrimental to U.S. economic and energy security interests,"
millstone around the neck”of the US of A.
… serve as a model to other countries, flows from innovation, technology breakthroughs, and energy efficiency gains,”is completely ridiculous considering the most recent tax cuts and the proposed federal research budget cuts for 2018.
What It’s Like Inside the Trump Administration’s Regulatory Rollback at the EPAExcellent article and comments.
https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-trump-regulatory-rollback-epa (https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-trump-regulatory-rollback-epa)
The Trump administration's pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency's Midwest office is a former Wisconsin state official who rolled back enforcement of anti-pollution laws, reduced funding for scientific research and scrubbed references to human-caused climate change from government websites.http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-trump-midwest-epa-director-20171219-story.html
Cathy Stepp, who since August has been a deputy regional administrator in the EPA's Kansas City, Kan., office, will take over the top spot at the agency's Chicago outpost less than two years after the Obama administration ousted a predecessor over the agency's lax response to the Flint, Mich., water crisis.
The Midwest office traditionally has been one of the agency's biggest and busiest, prosecuting companies that pollute the air, water and land in Illinois and five other states around the Great Lakes. The Trump administration has been pushing for deep cuts in the EPA's budget and proposing massive layoffs of agency employees.
An EPA statement announcing Stepp's appointment Tuesday included references to her background as a homebuilder, Republican state lawmaker and director of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources under Republican Gov. Scott Walker. ...
Two months after proposing to open a massive area of the Gulf of Mexico to oil and gas companies for offshore drilling, the Trump administration has halted a study that aimed to make drilling platforms safer.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine announced Thursday that the Interior Department suspended a $580,000 study to update and enhance the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement’s oil and gas inspection program. “The stop work order, dated Dec. 7, says that within 90 days [it] will either be lifted or work on the study can resume, or the contract to perform the study will be terminated.” ...
It was the second time in four months that the administration has blocked a National Academies study. In August, a study of health effects related to mountaintop removal to extract coal in West Virginia was abruptly curtailed “largely as a result of the Department’s changing budget situation,” Interior said. ...https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/12/21/this-study-aimed-to-make-offshore-drilling-safer-trump-just-put-a-stop-to-it/
WASHINGTON—“Christmas came early for bird killers. By acting to end industries’ responsibility to avoid millions of gruesome bird deaths per year, the White House is parting ways with more than 100 years of conservation legacy,” said David O’Neill, Audubon’s chief conservation officer, in response to the Trump Administration's decision to no longer enforce the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) in cases of incidental bird deaths.http://www.audubon.org/news/the-white-house-turns-its-back-americas-birds
“Gutting the MBTA runs counter to decades of legal precedent as well as basic conservative principles—for generations Republicans and Democrats have embraced both conservation and economic growth and now this Administration is pitting them against each other. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act is one of the most important conservation laws we have.
“We will engage our 1.2 million members to defend the MBTA from this and any other attack on the laws that protect birds.”
Congress passed the MBTA in 1918 (2018 will be its centennial year) in response to public outcry over the mass slaughter of birds, which threatened egrets and other species with extirpation. The law prohibits killing or harming America’s birds except under certain conditions, including managed hunting seasons for game species. The law protects more than 1,000 bird species in part because it requires industries implement commonsense best management practices like covering tar pits and marking transmission lines. ...
A Trump administration nominee is embroiled in controversy about alleged radiation contamination of drinking water.https://connect.wateronline.com/doc/trump-environmental-nominee-allegedly-ignored-water-rule-0001
“Kathleen Hartnett White, President Trump’s pick for a powerful White House environmental post, is backing away from her testimony before senators denying a role in under reporting radiation contamination in Texas drinking water,” Scripps News reported. ...
We all knew we would see this mindless and favorite denier tactic from Trump eventually during the cold snap in the US. Here it is.
The more I read about the Trump Presidency and perhaps more than anything the assaults on science and environmental protection, the more I realise that Judas Iscariot was an amateur.
100-year-old bird protection law, repealed.
The White House Turns Its Back on America’s Birds
The Trump Administration will no longer hold industry accountable for bird deaths.QuoteWASHINGTON—“Christmas came early for bird killers. By acting to end industries’ responsibility to avoid millions of gruesome bird deaths per year, the White House is parting ways with more than 100 years of conservation legacy,” said David O’Neill, Audubon’s chief conservation officer, in response to the Trump Administration's decision to no longer enforce the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) in cases of incidental bird deaths.http://www.audubon.org/news/the-white-house-turns-its-back-americas-birds
“Gutting the MBTA runs counter to decades of legal precedent as well as basic conservative principles—for generations Republicans and Democrats have embraced both conservation and economic growth and now this Administration is pitting them against each other. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act is one of the most important conservation laws we have.
“We will engage our 1.2 million members to defend the MBTA from this and any other attack on the laws that protect birds.”
Congress passed the MBTA in 1918 (2018 will be its centennial year) in response to public outcry over the mass slaughter of birds, which threatened egrets and other species with extirpation. The law prohibits killing or harming America’s birds except under certain conditions, including managed hunting seasons for game species. The law protects more than 1,000 bird species in part because it requires industries implement commonsense best management practices like covering tar pits and marking transmission lines. ...
Unfortunately this seems to be the norm for much emanating from Washington recently.
Are there any estimates on how this repeal will impact the bird populations? I feel like no though has been put into this decision.
100-year-old bird protection law, repealed.
The White House Turns Its Back on America’s Birds
The Trump Administration will no longer hold industry accountable for bird deaths.QuoteWASHINGTON—“Christmas came early for bird killers. By acting to end industries’ responsibility to avoid millions of gruesome bird deaths per year, the White House is parting ways with more than 100 years of conservation legacy,” said David O’Neill, Audubon’s chief conservation officer, in response to the Trump Administration's decision to no longer enforce the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) in cases of incidental bird deaths.http://www.audubon.org/news/the-white-house-turns-its-back-americas-birds
“Gutting the MBTA runs counter to decades of legal precedent as well as basic conservative principles—for generations Republicans and Democrats have embraced both conservation and economic growth and now this Administration is pitting them against each other. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act is one of the most important conservation laws we have.
“We will engage our 1.2 million members to defend the MBTA from this and any other attack on the laws that protect birds.”
Congress passed the MBTA in 1918 (2018 will be its centennial year) in response to public outcry over the mass slaughter of birds, which threatened egrets and other species with extirpation. The law prohibits killing or harming America’s birds except under certain conditions, including managed hunting seasons for game species. The law protects more than 1,000 bird species in part because it requires industries implement commonsense best management practices like covering tar pits and marking transmission lines. ...
Are there any estimates on how this repeal will impact the bird populations? I feel like no though has been put into this decision.
100-year-old bird protection law, repealed.
The White House Turns Its Back on America’s Birds
The Trump Administration will no longer hold industry accountable for bird deaths.QuoteWASHINGTON—“Christmas came early for bird killers. By acting to end industries’ responsibility to avoid millions of gruesome bird deaths per year, the White House is parting ways with more than 100 years of conservation legacy,” said David O’Neill, Audubon’s chief conservation officer, in response to the Trump Administration's decision to no longer enforce the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) in cases of incidental bird deaths.http://www.audubon.org/news/the-white-house-turns-its-back-americas-birds
“Gutting the MBTA runs counter to decades of legal precedent as well as basic conservative principles—for generations Republicans and Democrats have embraced both conservation and economic growth and now this Administration is pitting them against each other. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act is one of the most important conservation laws we have.
“We will engage our 1.2 million members to defend the MBTA from this and any other attack on the laws that protect birds.”
Congress passed the MBTA in 1918 (2018 will be its centennial year) in response to public outcry over the mass slaughter of birds, which threatened egrets and other species with extirpation. The law prohibits killing or harming America’s birds except under certain conditions, including managed hunting seasons for game species. The law protects more than 1,000 bird species in part because it requires industries implement commonsense best management practices like covering tar pits and marking transmission lines. ...
Are there any estimates on how this repeal will impact the bird populations? I feel like no though has been put into this decision.
...
It is unlikely to have any impact. The administration did not repeal the 100-year-old bird protection law, as claimed. They only removed the 2-year-old unintentional killings enacted by the Obama administration, which has not even been enforced yet. The original MBTA is still intact.
...
It is unlikely to have any impact. The administration did not repeal the 100-year-old bird protection law, as claimed. They only removed the 2-year-old unintentional killings enacted by the Obama administration, which has not even been enforced yet. The original MBTA is still intact.
The decision removes the responsibility for industry to act in ways that prevent bird deaths. As long as they don’t set out to directly kill birds, they get a pass to do whatever isn’t otherwise illegal.
“The law protects more than 1,000 bird species in part because it requires industries implement commonsense best management practices like covering tar pits and marking transmission lines.”
Just before Christmas, the Interior Department quietly rescinded an array of policies designed to elevate climate change and conservation in decisions on managing public lands, waters and wildlife. Order 3360, signed by Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt, explains that the policies were rescinded because they were “potential burdens” to energy development.http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/01/the-interior-department-has-cleared-the-way-for-energy-developers-to-destroy-natural-habitats/
The order echoes earlier mandates from President Donald Trump and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to Interior’s 70,000 employees: Prioritize energy development and de-emphasize climate change and conservation. The order is another in a long string of examples of science and conservation taking a backseat to industry’s wishes at the Interior Department under Zinke. ...
The Interior Department Has Cleared the Way for Energy Developers to Destroy Natural HabitatsQuoteJust before Christmas, the Interior Department quietly rescinded an array of policies designed to elevate climate change and conservation in decisions on managing public lands, waters and wildlife. Order 3360, signed by Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt, explains that the policies were rescinded because they were “potential burdens” to energy development.http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/01/the-interior-department-has-cleared-the-way-for-energy-developers-to-destroy-natural-habitats/
The order echoes earlier mandates from President Donald Trump and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to Interior’s 70,000 employees: Prioritize energy development and de-emphasize climate change and conservation. The order is another in a long string of examples of science and conservation taking a backseat to industry’s wishes at the Interior Department under Zinke. ...
...
Perhaps we need another thread - Trump Administration assaults on the natural environment ?
...
Perhaps we need another thread - Trump Administration assaults on the natural environment ?
Not a bad idea. But I also feel the fewer Trump threads, the better. ;) :-\
The Trump Administration is quietly changing things on .gov websites - and a group of academics and non-profits is keeping track.https://amp.businessinsider.com/trump-administration-climate-change-references-scrubbed-from-websites-2018-1
The Environmental Data and Governance Initiative (EDGI) released a new report on Wednesday that details how references to our changing climate and greenhouse gases have been erased from federal webpages since President Donald Trump took office.
But new side-by-side comparisons from EDGI provide a kind of virtual trip back in time to the web before Trump took office, shedding light on the subtle ways that the administration is making it harder to track down information about climate change and alternative energy sources online. ...
...
Perhaps we need another thread - Trump Administration assaults on the natural environment ?
Not a bad idea. But I also feel the fewer Trump threads, the better. ;) :-\
I agree - compromise? Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science and the Envionment ?
Knowles told the Post that the board hasn't held a meeting since President Trump took office last January despite the board being required by law to meet two times each year.
"We were frozen out," Knowles told the newspaper.
Trump has tried to restrict science almost 100 times already. There are 91 entries on Columbia Law School’s “Silencing Science Tracker,” a searchable database released Friday that intends to document every instance of information censorship or restriction since President Donald Trump was elected. If this is an accurate tally, that means there’s been some kind of attempt to limit government scientific information once every week in Trump’s America.https://newrepublic.com/minutes/146680/trump-tried-restrict-science-almost-100-times-already
The online resource is a joint project of Columbia’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund, a non-profit originally created in 2011 to defend scientists from what at the time seemed like the biggest threat facing the climate science community: legal attacks against individual scientists by conservative groups. The group’s priorities have shifted somewhat since Trump’s election. “Political and ideological attacks on science have a long and shameful history, and such attacks are the most dangerous when carried out or condoned by government authorities,” said Lauren Kurtz, CSLDF’s executive director. ...
Canadian climate science faces crisis that may be felt globally, scientists warn
In a letter to Justin Trudeau, 250 scientists highlight their concern over the imminent end of a research program to better understand climate change
Canadian climate science is facing a looming crisis whose repercussions could be felt far beyond the country’s borders, hundreds of scientists have warned, after the Canadian government failed to renew the country’s only dedicated funding program for climate and atmospheric research.
In an open letter addressed to Justin Trudeau, more than 250 scientists from 22 countries highlight their concern over the imminent end of the C$35m Climate Change and Atmospheric Research program.
Launched in 2012, the program funded seven research networks that explored issues such as the impact of aerosols, changing sea ice and snow cover, as well as atmospheric temperatures in the high Arctic.
Much of the research emerging from the program was focused on Canada’s Arctic, yielding data sets that were used around the world by scientists seeking to better understand climate change and its impacts.
U.S.: House Science Committee Wants to Investigate a Government Scientist for Doing Science
https://theintercept.com/2018/01/22/linda-birnbaum-niehs-house-science-committee/
In 2013, then-committee Chairs Larry Bucshon and Paul Broun, expressed outrage about a 2012 article, in which she described the harms of endocrine-disrupting chemicals.
“The proliferation of inadequately tested chemicals in commerce may be contributing to the skyrocketing rates of disease,” Birnbaum wrote in that paper. The idea that low doses of chemicals are causing widespread health effects was by then already widely accepted by independent scientists and has since been echoed by the United Nations Environmental Program and the European Commission.
The American Museum of Natural History is under pressure to sever its ties to Rebekah Mercer, one of Donald Trump’s top donors who has used her family’s fortune to fund groups that seek to undermine scientists’ work on climate change.
More than 200 scientists have put their names to a letter that urges the museum to “end ties to anti-science propagandists and funders of climate science misinformation” and axe Mercer from its board of trustees, a position she has held since 2013.
A separate missive also calling for Mercer’s dismissal has been circulated among the museum’s own curators amid growing concern that the New York institution risks having its mission subverted by Mercer.
APPEARING TUESDAY AT a hearing of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee, Scott Pruitt faced a series of yes-or-no questions he could not — or perhaps would not — answer. Instead the EPA administrator dodged inquiries from committee Democrats with polite smiles and disquisitions on the history of various laws. ...https://theintercept.com/2018/01/30/scott-pruitt-epa-senate-hearing/
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) pledged Thursday to lead a "multi-state" lawsuit against the Trump administration for delaying a major water pollution rule.http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/371818-new-york-to-sue-epa-over-obama-water-rule-delay
Schneiderman's statement, one day after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the two-year delay, did not specify the states that would join him.
"The Trump administration's suspension of the Clean Water Rule threatens to eliminate protections for millions of miles of streams and acres of wetlands across the country," he said in a statement.
"The Trump administration's suspension of these vital protections is reckless and illegal. That is why I will lead a multistate coalition that will sue to block this rollback in court." ...
The former is the successor to the highly successful US-German gravity spacecraft that operated from 2002 to 2017. It's from the first Grace mission's observations, for example, that we know Greenland is currently losing about 280 billion tonnes of ice to the ocean every year. Grace Follow-On will work in the same way as its predecessor did, but it will also demonstrate a laser range-finder. "It's a first in space, and it allows us to do the ranging with much higher precision - a factor of 10 to 20 times better," says US space agency (Nasa) deputy project scientist Felix Landerer. "So, we go from that human hair thickness down to the scale of large viruses."
Back here on Earth, the other ice project this year also involves a laser. IceSat-2 will fire six green beams of light at the Arctic floes and land ice-sheets to measure their shape. Simple but effective: the satellite times the return of the reflected beams and converts that into a range, which in turn is converted into an elevation. The hope is IceSat-2 will be up and operating before Europe's ageing CryoSat mission dies.
More than 60 researchers and technologists are running for federal office in 2018 as part of a historic wave of candidates with science backgrounds launching campaigns.https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/science-candidates_us_5a74fffde4b06ee97af2ae60
At least 200 candidates with previous careers in science, technology, engineering and math announced bids for some of the nation’s roughly 7,000 state legislature seats as of Jan. 31, according to data that 314 Action, a political action committee, shared exclusively with HuffPost.
The group, which launched in 2014 to help scientists run for office, said it is talking with 500 more people and is pressing about half of them to run. An additional 200 such candidates are running for school boards.
“The sheer number is really astonishing,” 314 Action founder Shaughnessy Naughton told HuffPost. “We’ve never seen anything like this.”
This is the largest number of scientists to run for public office in modern history. If any of them win, it could dramatically multiply the number of scientists in Congress beyond Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.), the lone Ph.D. scientist, a physicist.
The surge in congressional bids comes as scientists are experiencing a fierce political backlash. A year into his first term, President Donald Trump has yet to name a science adviser and has proposed dramatically slashing research budgets across federal agencies. He openly mocks the widely accepted science behind global warming and has nominated ardent climate deniers to key environmental positions. Under Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt, the White House has reversed regulations to reduce greenhouse gases and put new rules in place to give control of the agency’s science advisory boards to researchers paid by industries. ...
A White House official confirms with NPR that Kathleen Hartnett White's controversial nomination to head the Council on Environmental Quality is being withdrawn.https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/04/583069522/reports-white-house-to-withdraw-controversial-nominee-for-top-environmental-post
The Washington Post first reported the decision to drop Hartnett White's nomination. Citing anonymous administration officials, the Post says Harnett's nomination couldn't win enough favorable support, "with some Senate Republicans raising questions about her expertise." ...
At last, something it looks like Trumpistan has failed to stop (so far).
Space lasers to track Earth's ice
Grace Follow-On and IceSat-2.QuoteThe former is the successor to the highly successful US-German gravity spacecraft that operated from 2002 to 2017. It's from the first Grace mission's observations, for example, that we know Greenland is currently losing about 280 billion tonnes of ice to the ocean every year. Grace Follow-On will work in the same way as its predecessor did, but it will also demonstrate a laser range-finder. "It's a first in space, and it allows us to do the ranging with much higher precision - a factor of 10 to 20 times better," says US space agency (Nasa) deputy project scientist Felix Landerer. "So, we go from that human hair thickness down to the scale of large viruses."
With luck the GRACE Follow-On satellites go up next month. Maybe new data starting late this year?
I had a look at the data from the last mission that lasted until the beginning of 2017. Didn't Trump say the ice-caps were growing?
Congressional Republicans are planning a two-fisted assault on climate and other environmental policies as they push a must-pass spending package for the current fiscal year, which is already half over.https://insideclimatenews.org/news/01032018/spending-bill-riders-environment-climate-dark-money-campaign-finance-political-donations
In a perennial ritual on Capitol Hill, they have laden the legislation with anti-environment riders. At the same time, they are pushing provisions this year that could turn on the spigots for a new flow of dark money into elections, according to a coalition of public interest groups and Democratic lawmakers.
...
More than 80 anti-environmental-policy riders are included in either the House-passed version of the new appropriations bill or in the Senate drafts this year, said Trip Van Noppen, president of Earthjustice. They include 12 riders to block enforcement of the Endangered Species Act, including protection of the Sage Grouse, whose numbers are dwindling across 11 western states, where habitat protection interferes with mining and oil and gas activities.
One rider would prohibit implementation of the Environmental Protection Agency's stringent ozone standard—a rule that EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has repeatedly sought to delay.
Congressional Republicans are also seeking to include provisions that would make it more difficult in the future to tighten air quality standards for ozone, more commonly known as smog. Ozone, a product of fossil fuel pollution, is one of the most thoroughly studied pollutants; the Obama administration's assessment of the science cited 2,300 studies that establish the threat it poses to health ...
John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, has killed an effort by the head of the Environmental Protection Agency to stage public debates challenging climate change science, according to three people familiar with the deliberations, thwarting a plan that had intrigued President Trump even as it set off alarm bells among his top advisers.https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/09/climate/pruitt-red-team-climate-debate-kelly.html
The idea of publicly critiquing climate change on the national stage has been a notable theme for Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the E.P.A. For nearly a year he has championed the notion of holding military-style exercises known as red team, blue team debates, possibly to be broadcast live, to question the validity of climate change.
Mr. Pruitt has spoken personally with Mr. Trump about the idea, and the president expressed enthusiasm for it, according to people familiar with the conversations.
But the plan encountered widespread resistance within the administration from Mr. Kelly and other top officials, who regarded it as ill-conceived and politically risky, and when Mr. Pruitt sought to announce it last fall, they weighed in to stop him. At a mid-December meeting set up by Mr. Kelly’s deputy, Rick Dearborn, to discuss the plan, Mr. Dearborn made it clear that his boss considered the idea “dead,” and not to be discussed further, according to people familiar with the meeting. ...
Mike Pompeo may be the first climate-denying secretary of state. Outgoing Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of Exxon Mobil, was well-known for clashing with President Donald Trump on the issue of climate change. Unlike Trump, who claims global warming is a “hoax,” Tillerson accepted climate science and advocated for remaining in the Paris climate agreement. Trump defied Tillerson, announcing in June that the U.S. would withdraw from the accord.https://newrepublic.com/minutes/147439/mike-pompeo-may-first-climate-denying-secretary-state
Trump’s new choice for secretary of state, CIA Director Mike Pompeo, is more likeminded on the issue. During his confirmation hearing last year, Pompeo refused to answer questions regarding climate change. “Frankly, as the director of CIA, I would prefer today not to get into the details of the climate debate and science,” he said. But as ThinkProgress reported last year, Pompeo’s past statements indicate unfounded skepticism of the science....
Nearly all U.S. science agencies would see their budgets grow in 2018, under a US$1.3-trillion spending deal announced on 21 March. For the second year in a row, lawmakers in Congress appear set to ignore the steep cuts sought by President Donald Trump.
The legislation would boost funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to a historic high of $37 billion, $3 billion over the 2017 level. The National Science Foundation (NSF) would receive $7.8 billion, $295 million more than it received last year. And NASA’s budget would rise to $20.1 billion, an increase of $1.1 billion.
One notable outlier to the overall trend: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Congress has proposed holding the agency’s funding at $8.1 billion, even with the 2017 level. But that may be a victory of sorts, given Trump has proposed slashing EPA funding by more than 30% in 2018, to $5.7 billion.
Seven Democratic states on Friday threatened to sue the Trump administration for its delay in enforcing an Obama administration rule on air pollution from landfills.http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/380008-states-threaten-to-sue-trump-epa-for-delay-in-enforcing-landfill
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was supposed to, by Nov. 30, approve state plans to comply with the 2016 landfill methane rule or impose federal compliance plans on states that do not comply.
But the agency did not complete that step of the process, which the states say is a violation of the EPA’s responsibilities under the Clean Air Act.
“Climate change is the most important global environmental issue of our time. We must act to address it now for the sake of our children,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D), who is leading the effort, said in a statement.
“EPA Administrator [Scott] Pruitt has a legal responsibility to enforce this critical landfill methane regulation. If he fails to do his job, our coalition is ready to go to court.” ...
A coalition of environmental groups is teaming up for a multi-pronged campaign to try to get Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) head Scott Pruitt fired or to resign.http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/380551-greens-launch-campaign-to-get-pruitt-fired
The groups, including the Sierra Club, Green For All and Center for American Progress Action, are dubbing its campaign “Boot Pruitt.”
Its components, launching Wednesday, include commercials on cable shows targeted directly at President Trump, digital advertisements targeted on users in Pruitt’s home state of Oklahoma, web-based petitions, grass-roots advocacy and a dedicated website, BootPruitt.com. ...
With those pesky snoops at NASA out of the way, what do you bet that Trump's America now does better than all those nations still tied to their stupid Paris Pledges. :(
Making America Green Again!
Terry
The Trump administration appears to be trying to kill off a program that you may have never heard of, in what critics say is a sign of the administration’s hostility toward climate science.
At $10 million per year, the Carbon Monitoring System is dwarfed by the multibillion-dollar NASA missions that launch satellites into space. It pays for research that gathers information from Earth-observing satellites and other tools to measure the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, oceans and forests around the world.
“If you wanted to mitigate climate change, and therefore wanted to manage carbon, you can’t do it unless you can measure it,” said George Hurtt, a researcher at the University of Maryland who was the science team leader for the program.
Philip B. Duffy, the president and executive director of the Woods Hole Research Center in Massachusetts, said canceling the program would be “a blow to climate science.” The 65 projects funded by the program have produced nearly 300 research papers since 2010, when Congress created it.
The move comes down to politics, said Eddie Bernice Johnson, Democrat of Texas, who serves as ranking member of the House science committee. “I think it’s obvious to anyone that has been paying attention that this program is being canceled because it tracks carbon pollution, and that information would be used in efforts to understand and respond to climate change,” she said.
The program’s uncertain future was first reported in the journal Science.
The Trump administration’s fiscal year 2018 budget called for the program’s end, but Congress provided adequate funding in its omnibus spending bill. That funding would usually mean that the program would continue, but NASA appears to have interpreted things differently.
Stephen E. Cole, an agency spokesman, said Congress needed to provide explicit language to keep the program in place. Mr. Cole added that the Carbon Monitoring System was only one small part of a well-funded array of earth science programs at the agency, including the twin Grace-FO satellites that the agency launched on Tuesday to monitor how water moves around the earth. “There is still a whole lot going on,” he said.
The program may yet survive. This month Bill Nelson, Democrat of Florida and ranking member of the Senate committee on commerce, science and transportation, wrote a letter to two committee chairmen demanding that funding be restored. Expressing “deep concern,” he called the program “a relatively small investment that gives researchers the tools to analyze data and observations from across NASA’s Earth science missions.”
Last week the House Appropriations Committee passed an amendment that would restore funding to the program. If a similar measure passes the Senate, the Carbon Monitoring System could be saved.
After several months of the torch of public attention, Scott Pruitt has finally melted. Global slime levels rose perceptibly. Good riddance.
After several months of the torch of public attention, Scott Pruitt has finally melted. Global slime levels rose perceptibly. Good riddance.
His replacement, Wheeler, is worse. Same ideology, lobbyist for coal, buddy with Inhofe, much more presentable, won't tick all the boxes for corruption. Like Pence, he will do more harm than the original.
NEW ORLEANS (Reuters) - Pumping carbon dioxide into the air makes the planet greener; the United Nations puts out fake science about climate change to control the global energy market; and wind and solar energy are simply “dumb”.
These are among the messages that flowed from the America First Energy Conference in New Orleans this week, hosted by some of the country’s most vocal climate change doubters - and attended by a handful of Trump administration officials.
The second annual conference, organized by the conservative thinktank the Heartland Institute, pulled together speakers from JunkScience, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, and the Center For Industrial Progress, along with officials from the U.S. Department of Interior and the White House for panels that included: “Carbon Taxes, Cap & Trade, and Other Bad Ideas,” “Fiduciary Malpractice: The Sustainable Investment Movement,” and “Why CO2 Emissions Are Not Creating A Climate Crisis.”
The U.S. officials who joined included White House Special Assistant Brooke Rollins, Interior Department Assistant Secretary Joe Balash, and Jason Funes, an assistant in the office of external affairs at Interior. They praised the administration’s moves to clear the way for oil industry activity, and steered clear of commenting on climate change.
But their presence gave climate change doubters at the conference a boost: “It’s a step in the right direction,” said self-described climate change doubter Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama, referring to the U.S. officials in attendance.
Prominent US climate scientists have told the Guardian that the Trump administration is holding up research funding as their projects undergo an unprecedented political review by the high-school football teammate of the US interior secretary.
The US interior department administers over $5.5bn in funding to external organizations, mostly for research, conservation and land acquisition. At the beginning of 2018, interior secretary Ryan Zinke instated a new requirement that scientific funding above $50,000 must undergo an additional review to ensure expenditures “better align with the administration’s priorities”.
Zinke has signaled that climate change is not one of those priorities: this week, he told Breitbart News that “environmental terrorist groups” were responsible for the ongoing wildfires in northern California and, ignoring scientific research on the issue, dismissed the role of climate change.
Steve Howke, one of Zinke’s high-school football teammates, oversees this review. Howke’s highest degree is a bachelor’s in business administration. Until Zinke appointed him as an interior department senior adviser to the acting assistant secretary of policy, management and budget, Howke had spent his entire career working in credit unions.
Congrats to those who thought this was the least destructive binary choice in 2016.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/new-trump-power-plant-plan-would-release-hundreds-of-millions-of-tons-of-co2-into-the-air/2018/08/18/be823078-a28e-11e8-83d2-70203b8d7b44_story.html?utm_term=.21d465d95d27
New Trump power plant plan would release hundreds of millions of tons of CO2 into the air
Bunch of wimps in the EPA. Why not go all the way - regulate maximum vehicle efficiency, e.g. prohibit the manufacture or sale of personal vehicles that are rated at above 15 miles per US gallon.
The governor’s Global Climate Action Summit — and the Trump administration’s reluctance to pursue robust climate research – opened the door wide open for the governor to pull the satellite vision out of the archives.
“With science still under attack and the climate threat growing, we’re launching our own damn satellite,” Brown said in prepared remarks.
Nineteen months after it received a nonprofit’s Freedom of Information Act request, the Environmental Protection Agency has responded with a small batch of documents that seem to undercut former Administrator Scott Pruitt’s hint of internal agency studies concluding that scientists are undecided about the human impact on climate change.
Documents posted on Thursday by the nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility show that the agency conducted a:Quote“multi-month search for any evidence contradicting the proposition that human activity is the primary driver of climate change and now admits that it has found virtually nothing of substance,”as summarized by the nonprofit’s attorney.Quote... “Of the 1,037 Outlook records that EPA reviewed 11 were responsive to PEER's request, as clarified. All 11 records were different versions of the same document. The document included EPA's responses to multiple Questions for the Record that EPA received from members of the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works following Administrator Pruitt's testimony in front of the Committee on January 30, 2018. Today, EPA is releasing the final version of that document that was sent to Congress."The result, PEER noted, is a single noteworthy official document, which was not scientific research but correspondence with a Senate panel.
This is one of Trump’s vocal cheerleaders, sharing his thoughts on the cryosphere.
This is one of Trump’s vocal cheerleaders, sharing his thoughts on the cryosphere.
Doh! The stupid, it burns ...
This is one of Trump’s vocal cheerleaders, sharing his thoughts on the cryosphere.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-tL3GE6_AyDQ/W8UfAJ6JW-I/AAAAAAAAq1c/gVr0Au3I4uwwrI6j9apNKQNRnPiBF3aVwCHMYCw/image%255B6%255D?imgmax=600)
11 October 2018 (Silencing Science Tracker (http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/resources/silencing-science-tracker/)) – On 11 October 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) disbanded the particulate matter (PM) review panel.
In the past, the panel has provided advice to EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), which is responsible for reviewing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants.
Under the Clean Air Act, CASAC is required to periodically review the NAAQS, and recommend appropriate changes thereto to protect public health. When reviewing the NAAQS for PM, CASAC has historically relied on advice from the PM review panel, which is comprised of two dozen university researchers and others with special expertise on the health effects of PM. The panel will not, however, have a role in CASAC’s next review.QuoteOn 11 October 2018, EPA sent an email to panel members, informing them that “the CASAC PM Review Panel will no longer be involved with the Agency’s PM NAAQS Review and your service on the panel has concluded.”
On September 27, 2018, the Washington Post reported that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plans to close its Office of the Science Advisor. The office, which was established in the mid-1990s, provides scientific advice to the EPA Administrator. According to its website, the office also leads “science policy development and implementation” at EPA, with the goal of “ensur[ing] that the highest quality science is better integrated into the Agency’s policies and decisions.”
The Office of Science Advisor is currently led by Dr. Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, who serves as EPA’s Science Advisor, and chairs the Agency’s Science and Technology Policy Council. Dr. Orme-Zavaleta has worked at EPA for 37 years and is described on its website as an expert in “the evaluation of risks to human health” from “synthetic organic and inorganic chemicals, radionuclides, microorganisms, and vector-borne disease.” It is unclear whether Dr. Orme-Zavaleta will remain at EPA after the Office of Science Advisor is closed.
President Donald Trump's administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court stop a novel and sweeping lawsuit pressed by children and teenagers seeking to force the federal government to take steps against climate change
Thursday's emergency filing aims to head off a trial that's set to start Oct. 29 in federal court in Oregon. It's the administration's second attempt to have the nation's highest court intervene in the case.
Although the Supreme Court rejected the first request in July as premature, the justices hinted at skepticism about the lawsuit, saying its breadth was "striking." Since that order was issued, the Senate has confirmed Justice Brett Kavanaugh to succeed the retired Justice Anthony Kennedy.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is quietly moving to weaken U.S. radiation regulations, turning to scientific outliers who argue that a bit of radiation damage is actually good for you — like a little bit of sunlight.
The government's current, decades-old guidance says that any exposure to harmful radiation is a cancer risk. And critics say the proposed change could lead to higher levels of exposure for workers at nuclear installations and oil and gas drilling sites, medical workers doing X-rays and CT scans, people living next to Superfund sites and any members of the public who one day might find themselves exposed to a radiation release.
(https://i1.wp.com/thearmchairobserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/a553746f-fe4d-418f-85c9-01dfdfa126cc_screenshot-620x246.jpg) (https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/a553746f-fe4d-418f-85c9-01dfdfa126cc)Edward Calabrese - Cato Institute Profile (https://www.cato.org/people/edward-calabrese) - Funded by the Cato Institute & DoD
What's a little fallout, huh? Have a nice day!
The Environmental Protection Agency has recruited controversial scientists to argue that just a little bit of radiation may actually be good for public health, in an attempt to relax standards on radiation levels that the administration considers burdensome.
The Associated Press reports that at a congressional hearing Wednesday to discuss the proposed rollback of standards, the EPA’s lead witness will be University of Massachusetts toxicologist Edward Calabrese (https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2015/10/25/is-petition-for-increasing-public-exposure-to-radiation-a-usnrc-inside-job-retired-nrc-counsel-carol-marcus-wrote-another-petition-at-the-request-of-nrc-staff/), who believes that increased exposure to small amounts of radiation “would have a positive effect on human health as well as save billions and billions and billions of dollars.”Quote100 mSv is 100 x more public exposure than the 1 mSv recommended internationally by the ICRP and 400 x more than the 0.25 mSv recommended by the US EPA.Calabrese argues that radiation can act as a stressor, which will activate the body’s repair mechanisms. But other scientists have refuted the EPA’s argument, noting that Calabrese’s reasoning has been “generally dismissed by the great bulk of scientists.”
The proposal has also concerned advocates for worker safety, who fear that relaxing standards will jeopardize the health of nuclear-plant workers, X-ray technicians, and anyone else unlucky enough to come into contact with radiation. “There’s no reason not to protect people as much as possible,” said the wife of a man who works at a nuclear-weapons plant.
Democrats are reportedly planning to revive a House committee on climate change after winning back control of the House.https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/415723-house-dems-plan-to-bring-back-committee-on-climate-change
The Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming was dissolved by Republicans in 2011 after the GOP took control, but House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will ask Democrats to reconstitute it, The New York Times reported Wednesday.
The special committee, which was started by Pelosi, was not authorized to advance legislation, but the panel held hearings to address concerns about climate change, extreme weather events and global warming.
Environmentalists are hoping that Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas) will bring science back to the House science committee when she takes over as chair in the next Congress.https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/415589-all-eyes-on-top-democrat-to-bring-science-back-to-science-committee
Johnson, if elected chair, will be the first woman with a degree in a STEM field to hold the position since 1990. She was the first registered nurse elected to Congress when she won her first term in 1993, and she’s served as ranking member on House Science, Space and Technology Committee since 2011.
The Democrat will represent a significant shift from the previous chairman, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas).
Smith introduced controversial bills including the Secret Science Reform Act and worked in tandem with the Trump administration to introduce heavily criticized policies on science transparency to the Environmental Protection Agency and Interior Department.