Among the findings: Carbon monoxide decreased by 39 percent, ozone by 6 percent, and sulfur dioxide by 32 percent.
“Pick any category you want and pollution levels are generally lower than they were seven years ago,” said Steven Hayward, the policy analyst who authored the report, titled “Index of Leading Environmental Indicators,” for the conservative think tank.
“(Environmental groups) said air pollution was out of control, but this was always more about politics than it was fact,” Hayward said.
…
…in looking over the data on air quality from the Bush years, Hayward notes that levels of most air pollutants decreased at a faster rate than they did during the Clinton administration.
That’s right kids, the Watermelons were playing politics rather than focusing on the environment.
An environmentalist opposed to Nuclear Energy did some honest research and came to the conclusion that only Nuclear Power can provide the base load of clean electricity needed. Actual science trumps rhetoric.
The president invited 36 House Democrats to the White House Tuesday morning to discuss a path forward on the bill in an effort to bridge divides that threaten to torpedo one of the touchstones of Obama’s young presidency.
All of these democrats have an eye on the calendar. BHO knows he needs to shove the worst of his socialist agenda down the throats of Americans while his party has the majority. So he wants to get as much done before the 2010 elections as possible.
Congressional democrats, especially those in the House are also looking at the 2010 elections. They are going to be up for reelection then, not Barry. If their districts get slammed economically for what the congressional Republicans are accurately calling “…a declaration of economic war on the midwest by liberals on Capitol Hill,” those Congressional democrats could loose their next election.
To make it worse, the White House is still backing ethanol, a clear sign they are in the pockets of the Corn lobby. Most Americans have figured out that using food crops to make fuel don’t make sense on economic or environmental reasons. If Team Lightbringer had the guts to cut corn based fuel from their plan, and focus on switchgrass or wood chips, they would have more creditability, but that would mean having to give up the corn lobby money.
Some environmentalists, who have successfully fought a wind farm on the border of Oregon and Washington, are trying to block a massive solar plant in the Mojave desert. And now an Oregon county is considering a ban on wind power in the foothills of the blue mountains.
As much as most environmentalists down play “dissension in the ranks”, it’s there.
That is because there are groups with very different goals hiding the “green.”
There are actual Environmentalists who really do care about what is best for the planet and humanity, and then there are the watermelons, who show a thin green skin to world, but are Red to the core. Their goal is the promotion of a socialist agenda and as one of the founders of Greenpeace has pointed out, they have hijacked his movement in order to do so.
Update: Michelle Malkin has more data on how democrat Waxman is trying to bypass debate and shove our Dear Leader‘s Cap & Tax scheme through the House. She also has a list of democrat congressmen who are feeling the heat from outraged voters.
A warning to AGW cultists, actual science is used in video below to dispute Al Gore’s fear mongering.
Remember kids, Al Gore founded a company that sells “Carbon Credits.” Those are modern plenary indulgence payments to the AGW Cult the gullible make. Even the New York Times calls the practice a scam. If you are wondering why someone like Al Gore, former Senator and former Vice-President of the United States of America, is participating in an obvious scam based on junk science, I suggest you follow the advice of the man who wrote the screen play.
The first sales will be limited to California, and then Florida and Texas. Seriously, I don’t see this thing being able to handle a New England winter.
“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — George Wald, Harvard Biologist
“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” — Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist
“By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” — Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist
“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” — Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day
“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” — Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University
“Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….” — Life Magazine, January 1970
“At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” — Kenneth Watt, Ecologist
“Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” — Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist
Ok, Ehrlich was sorta right on this, if you restrict his predictions to modern Communist China, where they are showing the typical communist/socialist contempt for the environment.
“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” — Kenneth Watt, Ecologist
Now we get to my personal favorite, although probably not Al Gore‘s… “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” — Kenneth Watt, Ecologist
If you want clean, “Carbon Neutral” electrical energy, and plenty of it, to power enough electric & plug in hybrid vehicles to tell the House of Saud they can drink their oil, then you need to follow the advice of Dr. Pournelle.
I have to say it again: cheap energy will cause a boom. The only cheap energy I know of is nuclear. Three Hundred Billion bucks in nuclear power will do wonders for the economy. We build 100 1000 MegaWatt nuclear power plants — they will cost no more than 2 billion each and my guess is that the average cost will be closer to 1 billion each (that is the first one costs about 20 billion and the 100th costs about 800 million). The rest of the money goes to prizes and X projects to convert electricity into mobility.
I am not alone among seasoned environmental activists in changing my mind on this subject. British atmospheric scientist James Lovelock, father of the Gaia theory, believes that nuclear energy is the only way to avoid catastrophic climate change. Stewart Brand, founder of the “Whole Earth Catalog,” says the environmental movement must embrace nuclear energy to wean ourselves from fossil fuels. On occasion, such opinions have been met with excommunication from the anti-nuclear priesthood: The late British Bishop Hugh Montefiore, founder and director of Friends of the Earth, was forced to resign from the group’s board after he wrote a pro-nuclear article in a church newsletter.
…
Over the past 20 years, one of the simplest tools — the machete — has been used to kill more than a million people in Africa, far more than were killed in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings combined. What are car bombs made of? Diesel oil, fertilizer and cars. If we banned everything that can be used to kill people, we would never have harnessed fire.
…
the 103 nuclear plants operating in the United States effectively avoid the release of 700 million tons of CO2emissions annually — the equivalent of the exhaust from more than 100 million automobiles. Imagine if the ratio of coal to nuclear were reversed so that only 20 percent of our electricity was generated from coal and 60 percent from nuclear. This would go a long way toward cleaning the air and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Every responsible environmentalist should support a move in that direction.
Australia Antarctic Division glaciology program head Ian Allison said sea ice losses in west Antarctica over the past 30 years had been more than offset by increases in the Ross Sea region, just one sector of east Antarctica.
“Sea ice conditions have remained stable in Antarctica generally,” Allison said.
Ice core drilling in the fast ice off Australia’s Davis Station in East Antarctica by the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Co-Operative Research Center shows that last year, the ice had a maximum thickness of 1.89m, its densest in 10 years.
A paper to be published soon by the British Antarctic Survey in the journal Geophysical Research Letters is expected to confirm that over the past 30 years, the area of sea ice around the continent has expanded.
Just one-out-of-three voters (34%) now believe global warming is caused by human activity,
…
Forty-eight percent (48%) of all likely voters attribute climate change to long-term planetary trends, while seven percent (7%) blame some other reason. Eleven percent (11%) aren’t sure.
These numbers reflect a reversal from a year ago when 47% blamed human activity while 34% said long-term planetary trends.