Chicago Tribune: Propagandist for the EPA

There was once a time when the grand and noble Chicago Tribune was a great newspaper.  Two of the most egregious mistakes they made were the famous “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline and their endorsement of Barrack Hussein Obama for the presidency.

This was the cover to the Sunday edition for January 22, 2012

Please note right away that in the photograph, it is mostly steam that is shown.

Propaganda story for the EPA In the Chicago Tribune

Right off the bat, “pollution” or some form of the word is used 15 times in the story.

CO2 IS NOT POLLUTION !!!!!

Don’t conflate the two.

About 6,700 power plants, refineries, steel mills and other major polluters are required under a 2008 federal law to provide detailed annual reports on their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other heat-trapping gases that contribute to climate change. The first results highlight the nation’s reliance on coal as an energy source and show why fossil fuel interests are lobbying fiercely to block federal and state efforts to limit the pollution.

There is a reason that we rely on coal.  IT WORKS !!  It is cheap and the output for energy far surpasses any of the “green” or “sustainable” choices for power.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/03/the-dark-future-of-solar-electricity/

The list of big polluters comes amid an increasingly rancorous debate about research showing that greenhouse gases, largely from burning fossil fuels, are driving up global temperatures. If the pollution remains unchecked, most climate scientists think a steadily warming planet could trigger widespread weather shifts, coastal flooding, prolonged droughts and deadly heat waves. There is greater uncertainty about how fast climate change is happening and how the human disruption of natural warming cycles affects things like sea levels and food supplies.

A rancorous debate??
You betcha !!!
STOP HIDING DATA !!!
Real science is about having verifiable and reproducible results.
“Most climate scientist THINK……” Well, let’s see them show results. (Consistently poor climate model results are just that, Consistently poor climate model results)

Gina McCarthy, the EPA’s top air official, told reporters during a recent conference call that she hopes the new data influence public opinion the same way a separate inventory of toxic chemicals pressured industry to reduce those emissions. By contrast, all of the Republican candidates for president oppose regulating greenhouse gases, and GOP lawmakers in Congress have repeatedly tried to strip the EPA of its power to set new pollution standards.

Once again, trying to conflate pollution with CO2.

As far as the GOP trying to strip power from the EPA, GREAT !!!!!!!!!!!!  Please note that America will lose about 8% of our electrical generating capacity due to these draconian and illegal EPA rules.  America has been the industrial giant with the greatest living standard because of cheap, plentiful and reliable electricity.  Why do we want to pay more for less power?

Under a deal with Illinois regulators, Midwest Generation has pledged to install pollution controls on its plants or shut them down by 2018. An ordinance backed by a majority of Chicago aldermen would require a quicker decision about Crawford and Fisk, forcing the company to switch from coal or shut the plants by next year.

Chicago Aldermen haven proven themselves to be some of the dimmest and completely short sided idiots in the State of Illinois,County of Cook, City of Chicago.  No one wants these Bozos making energy policy. Want more chance of blackouts or brown outs?? The City Council has a plan to contribute to it. Force an energy producing plant to shut down.

“We have always been open to discussing long-term transition plans for our energy supply, but such a transition requires sustainability of new energy sources,” said Charles Parnell, a Midwest Generation spokesman, in an email response to questions. The company is negotiating with state officials and Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s administration to shut down the Chicago plants sooner in return for a long-term contract to buy electricity from a wind farm in northwest Illinois.

This would be an unmitigated disaster for Illinois.

Some of these people just need to do the simple math as to how many windmills, how many biomass plants, how many solar panels it would to take to replace just one single coal fired plant.

But wait, is having less electricity the general purpose of the green movement? You have to wonder.

The White House started addressing climate change with industry-specific rules after negotiations over a sweeping national plan collapsed in Congress two years ago.
A House-passed bill, modeled after a program that reduced acid rain pollution, would have capped greenhouse gas emissions and set up a market-driven trading system where big polluters could buy credits from cleaner factories and power plants. But lobbying by fossil fuel interests killed the idea in the Senate.

That’s a polite way of saying that the President went against the will of Congress and implemented his own policy.

Illinois and other Midwest states had pledged to create their own regional trading system whether or not federal officials took action. That plan stalled indefinitely after Republican governors in Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin signaled they wouldn’t participate.

COMPLETE FAIL !!

The entire idea of trading carbon credits is a scam and a FAILED one at that:

http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opinion/blogs/the-bishops-gambit/carbon-offsets-have-already-run-out-of-credit-20110720-1hnmv.html

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/09/death-of-a-carbon-salesman-chicago-climate-exchange/

Unlike 2008, when both Democrat Obama and Republican John McCain promised during their campaigns to reduce greenhouse gases, the upcoming national election offers a clear political contrast on the issue. The remaining Republican candidates for president all have questioned the veracity of peer-reviewed science showing that man-made emissions are driving up global temperatures.

No, the science most certainly NOT settled.

Climategate I & Climategate II have shown that (in case you didn’t believe it).

One thing that has bothered me the most about the CAGW “debate” is the fact that the planet is an incredibly dynamic beast. The absolute hubris of man (liberal man) to think that “WE” have the kind of power and ability to change the climate of a 4.6 billion year old planet that once supported dinosaurs for millions of years.
And to all that, it is dumbed down to the simple idea that CO2 causes it all.
A short list for those people:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/30/earths-climate-system-is-ridiculously-complex-with-draft-link-tutorial/

Advertisements

One comment on “Chicago Tribune: Propagandist for the EPA

  1. trixfred30 says:

    Man even if we do get wiped out by pollution it’ll be China and India that do it not America and Europe. (And even then its more likely we blow each up 10 shit ways to hell or we get wiped out by a meteor) I lost interest in the climate debate when they reported that the doomsayer scientists had made all the data up anyway

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s