It was just this weekend when we saw the EPA moving head with sweeping regulations which redefine the meaning of the Clean Water Act, seeking to extend their control over every pool of water in the country, despite the fact that a federal judge had put enforcement of the regulations on hold in 13 states.
Today we’ll take a brief look at a case which has been percolating for quite a while and demonstrates the way that the agency can impact the lives of farmers and rural landowners. Andy Johnson, a farmer from Fort Bridger, Wyoming, made the bold move in 2012 of building a small earthen dam across a creek which runs through his property to create a stock pond for his horses and cattle.
We’re not talking about a hydroelectric dam on a river here.. this is a stream that you can walk across without getting the tops of your socks wet for most of the year.
McCarthy: You talkin' to me?A federal judge has once again slapped down the Environmental Protection Agency, this time for its attempt to seize control of virtually all water, anywhere in America. Is there no end to the EPA's overreach?
Judge Ralph Erickson minced no words in condemning the EPA's attempt to control much of America's privately held land by regulating the water on it, calling the EPA regulation "inexplicable, arbitrary and devoid of a reasoning process."
Erickson issued an injunction in the 13 states that sued. But the EPA, never one to give up a power grab, says it will impose its rule on the rest of us anyway.
President Obama's visit to Alaska on Monday will focus on the real-time effects global warming is having on the Arctic, while also helping to set the stage for reaching a global deal on climate change later in Paris in December.
The president will jet to Anchorage Monday to give the closing remarks at an international summit of Arctic nations meant to focus on the effects the Arctic faces from climate change. The summit also will be used to demonstrate political will for lowering greenhouse gas emissions and curbing global warming among the countries attending.
The State Department says the summit, known as GLACIER (Global Leadership in the Arctic: Cooperation, Innovation, Engagement and Resilience), will be used partly to build public support for reaching a deal at the United Nations global climate conference in Paris Nov. 30 through Dec. 11.
Review of Environmentalism Gone Mad:How a Sierra Club Activist and Senior EPA Analyst Discovered a Radical Green Energy Fantasy, by Alan Carlin (Mt. Vernon, Washington: Stairway Press), 565 pp., ISBN-978-1-941071-13-7, ISBN-978-1-941071-92-2; $24.62
It would be impossible to write a better book about environmentalism, global warming, government corruption, federal overreach, and the solutions to all the resulting problems.
Author Alan Carlin’s book provides an incredible look into his 38 years inside the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) after a significant stint working alongside the Sierra Club, and the degrees he earned in physics and economics add to the author’s unique perspective.
Do not be intimidated by the book’s length, because to be fair, it is three great books in one. It’s a memoir of a wonderful man and a brilliant scientist and economist, a short course in basic science and methodology, and a historical analysis of how many individuals, organizations, and governments cooperated to fabricate a catastrophic concern for a fraudulent global warming problem in order to gain unequaled power and money.
Shrinking glaciers, Arctic temperatures and a mix of messy energy politics await President Barack Obama as he begins his historic trip to Alaska.
Obama departs this morning for a three-day tour of the nation's largest state, closely choreographed to call attention to the ways Obama says climate change is already damaging Alaska's stunning scenery. By showcasing thawing permafrost, melting sea ice and eroding shorelines, Obama hopes to raise the sense of urgency to deal quickly to slow climate change in the U.S. and overseas.
His excursion north of the Arctic Circle will make Obama the first sitting president to step foot in the Alaska Arctic, home to Alaska Natives who have received less attention amid Obama's recent efforts to improve conditions for Native Americans. In a major show of solidarity, Obama announced on the eve of his trip that his administration is changing the name of North America's tallest peak, Mount McKinley, to Denali, its traditional Athabascan name.
Ohio lawmakers reacted angrily Sunday to the White House's announcement that President Obama would formally rename Alaska's Mt. McKinley — North America's highest peak — "Denali" during his trip to The Last Frontier this week.
"Mount McKinley ... has held the name of our nation's 25th President for over 100 years," Rep. Bob Gibbs, R-Ohio, said in a statement. "This landmark is a testament to his countless years of service to our country." Gibbs also described Obama's action as "constitutional overreach," saying that an act of Congress was required to rename the mountain, because a law formally naming it after Ohio's William McKinley was passed in 1917.
Reeling stock markets across the globe hammered savings, pension funds, innovation and growth. US stocks lost over $2 trillion in market value in eight days, before rallying somewhat, while the far smaller Shanghai Composite Index lost $1 trillion in four days of trading, the Wall Street Journal reports.
Battered economies continue to struggle. Investment banks are pulling out of developing countries. An already exploding and imploding Middle East now confronts a nuclear arms race and human exodus.
Complying just with federal regulations already costs American businesses and families $1.9 trillion per year, the Competitive Enterprise Institute calculates. That’s more than all 2014 personal and corporate income tax receipts combined – and Obama bureaucrats issued 3,554 new rules and regulations last year.
David Cameron has ordered ministers to ditch the ‘green crap’ blamed for driving up energy bills and making business uncompetitive, it is claimed. The Prime Minister, who once pledged to lead the ‘greenest government ever’, has publicly promised to ‘roll back’ green taxes, which add more than £110 a year to average fuel bills. But a senior Tory source said Mr Cameron’s message in private is far blunter. The source said: ‘He’s telling everyone, “We’ve got to get rid of all this green crap.” He’s absolutely focused on it.’ -- Daily Mail, 21 November 2013
Britain’s solar boom is over after ministers announced they would offer virtually no subsidies for people to install panels on their homes. In a surprise move, ministers on Thursday said that they plan to slash the amount of money given to families who put solar panels on their homes. Under the new proposals, the amount paid to homeowners under the “feed-in tariff” from next year will fall by nearly 90 per cent. Critics say the scheme, which was heavily pushed by energy firms, enables wealthy families to rake in subsidies paid for by many who are already struggling with their energy bills. --Peter Dominiczak, The Daily Telegraph, 28 August 2015
Earlier this week, the first installment of our 10-year Hurricane Katrina retrospective focused on the fact that Louisianans weren’t quite so much enamored of the “Bush’s fault” narrative the national media established to describe the poor response to the devastating storm and held the responsibility a bit closer to home.
But there is a good deal more to what you might have heard about Katrina that the people who lived through it and have spent the past 10 years trying to get beyond its effects simply don’t agree with.
First, as we discussed in the first installment, George W. Bush is not seen by the majority of Louisianans as the villain of the storm. That is not meant to say that the federal government is highly regarded for its performance where New Orleans is concerned.
Market research surveys commissioned by one of the nation’s largest environmentalist groups advises activists to “talk about yourselves as conservationists — not environmentalists,” “do not make global warming/climate change the primary rationale for conservation,” “do not use the threat of ‘sprawl’ unless with core supporters,” and “do not focus on ‘green’ jobs as a primary rationale for conservation.”
These quotes are found in a pair of documents, one from 2004 and one from 2013, that expose what might be called the environmental movement’s political messaging intended for public consumption.
As many as 73% of manufacturers want to see legislative reform of the UK's current environmental and climate change policies, according to a new survey by the manufacturers organisation EEF. Respondents claimed that existing regulations are harming their international competitiveness. Earlier this year, EEF’s senior climate and environment policy adviser warned that large UK manufacturers could be forced to move their operations overseas if countries cannot agree a unilateral cap on emissions at the Paris climate talks, thanks to the burden of environmental regulation. --Brad Allen, Edie News, 27 August 2015
The UK Government must do more to curb energy prices which are “seriously disadvantaging” Welsh industry, according to Carwyn Jones. The First Minister was reacting to news that 250 jobs are under threat at Llanwern steel works as Tata Steel prepares to mothball its hot strip mill there. Unions have warned that “communities will be destroyed” as a result. Speaking on BBC Radio Wales, Mr Jones said Tata, which is one of South Wales’ biggest employers is just one example of businesses in Wales struggling with the cost of energy prices in Britain, which are must lower across the rest of Europe. --Sion Morgan, Wales Online, 27 August 2015
In a recent speech to the Washington-based think tank Resources for the Future, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy promoted the White House’s new Clean Power Plan by: (a) appealing to science and disallowing any debate about it; (b) making statements unsupported by the science; (c) praising the economic analysis behind the plan; and (d) announcing rules that economic analysis says won’t work and will cost too much.
In other words, it was business as usual in the world of climate policy.
She started her speech by saying that scientists are as sure that humans cause climate change as they are that smoking causes cancer, and “we are way past any further discussion or debate….don’t debate about climate change any longer because it is our moral responsibility to act.”
From there she focused on the harms from extreme weather events, attributing the California drought to carbon dioxide emissions, as well as increased storms, wildfires and floods. She said anthropogenic climate change (i.e. global warming) leads to more extreme heat and, amazingly enough, more extreme cold. And she linked weather-related economic threats facing families and small businesses to anthropogenic climate change.