I would have thought after your first face to hood interaction with a vehicle that left your face so disfigured, that you would learn to walk on the sidewalk and stay out of the roadway where you are likely to encounter big trucks … js

 

Since Tyson Foods recently stuck it’s own feet in the fire by firing thousands of American workers and is replacing them with illegal invading criminals, I thought it only fair to remind everyone of Tyson Foods alliance with Protix, last year, to provide American dining tables with an ample supply of insect ingredients.
“The strategic investment will support the growth of the emerging insect ingredient industry and expand the use of insect ingredient solutions to create more efficient sustainable proteins and lipids for use in the global food system.”

https://www.tysonfoods.com/news/news-releases/2023/10/tyson-foods-announces-partnership-protix-more-sustainable-protein

 Volvo, an early Electric Car adopter, cuts off funding for its EV affiliate.

STOCKHOLM—Volvo Car said it won’t provide further funding to Polestar, the electric-car maker it created with Volvo’s Chinese owner Geely—the latest EV retrenchment by the global auto industry. The announcement sent the Swedish automaker's stock up more than 30% at market open. The automaker said earlier this month that it had missed its already-reduced delivery targets for 2023.
Polestar's shares are down just over 83% since it went public in June 2022 via a merger with a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC. Polestar last week said it planned to cut around 450 jobs globally, or about 15% of its workforce, amid "challenging market conditions".
The auto industry’s pivot to electric vehicles has been rocked by setbacks this year, just as a flood of new battery-powered models is hitting showrooms.
Earlier this week, French automaker Renault said it has decided to cancel the initial public offering of its electric-car unit Ampere. Ford, meanwhile, has slashed production of its electric F-150 Lightning, a pickup truck that has generated major buzz since its launch. Rental-car firm Hertz has said it was dumping about one-third of its EV rental car fleet, replacing the cars with gas-engine vehicles.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/volvo-cars-to-stop-funding-polestar-may-hand-stake-to-geely/ar-BB1hAW5A

New EV Issue: Tires Wear Down A Whole Lot Faster.
(Another financial hit in the wallet with electric vehicles.)

New tires every 7,000 miles? Electric cars save gas but tire wear shocks some Florida drivers.
It was love at first sight when Neil Semel saw the electric Mercedes EQS 450+ at a Pompano Beach dealership. The sedan was the perfect sleek black color his wife wanted, had only 2,200 miles and they both liked the idea of getting away from gasoline.
“I’ve always driven combustion engines and I thought it was time to try to save the planet,” Semel said.
But after less than 5,000 miles of driving around his Boca Raton neighborhood, Semel was shocked to find some essential — and very expensive — parts were already wearing out. The tires.
“If somebody looked at me and said, Mr. Semel, you are going to love this car but in about 7,000 miles you will have to pay 1,400 or 1,500 dollars to replace the tires, I wouldn’t have bought the car,” Semel said.
Pricey!
For many drivers of EVs in Florida — the nation’s second largest market for electrical vehicles — premature tire wear has become an unexpected black mark on vehicles promoted as a green climate-friendly option to gas-gulping cars.
At EV Garage Miami, a Sweetwater repair shop that services 90 percent electric vehicles, lead technician Jonathan Sanchez said tires are the most frequent thing customers come in about — no matter what model or make of EV they’re driving. Tire mileage can vary widely of course, but he said he frequently changes EV tires at just 8,000 to 10,000 miles — a fourth or even fifth of typical tire wear on a gas-burning car.
Is this something that they are seeing more in a warmer all year round environment like Florida, or happening everywhere? Does this cover all types of EVs, or just luxuries?
There are a number of explanations for the fast wear — from the way EVs work to the composition of the rubber to individual driving habits and maintenance practices — but vehicle and tire makers and industry experts acknowledge the issue. The tire manufacturer Michelin said conventional tires on electric vehicles consume tires 20 percent faster than on a gas-powered car — a figure commonly cited by EV makers as well — but Goodyear also has said they could wear up to 50 percent faster. Automakers and the tire industry are working on improvements.
So, it’s real. To go along with all the other higher costs associated with owning an EV, which takes the gas savings and blows it away with the Everything Else costs. Perhaps not as bad as some are saying, but, certainly, replacing tires quicker is not good.
That would be good for consumers but also for the climate. To some extent, running through tires quickly may offset the reduction of damaging emissions that EVs offer. Some studies have shown that tires actually have more particle pollution than exhaust, 2,000 times as much.
“Tires are rapidly eclipsing the tailpipe as a major source of emissions from vehicles,” said Nick Molden, to the Guardian who conducted one study with Emissions Analytics.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/electric-vehicles-great-mileage-pricey-141209778.html

 Electric Vehicles Enter the 'Total Failure' Phase of Their Existence.

Is it time to start asking whether electric vehicles have any redeeming value in 2024? Given the recent spate of bad news surrounding them, the answer to that question is becoming clearer.
As RedState reported, Ford has cut the production of its "Lightning" electric pickup truck in half. Why? Mainly because no one wants to buy them. Why do they not want to buy them? Because they are overpriced, unreliable, and impractical.
Who could have guessed that paying $55,000 (and that's with EV subsidies) for a stripped-down, base-level truck that overheats when you tow things and can't drive over 300 miles on a single charge wouldn't appeal to the average F-150 buyer? Certainly, people who use their trucks for work have found little to no use for such a pointless monstrosity.
It's not just the Lightning, though. The entire EV industry is getting hit by reality right now.
There is no better example of government idiocy than the top-down push for electric vehicles, which at this point has cost American taxpayers tens of billions of dollars. They were a solution to a problem that didn't exist, and even then, they turned out to not be a solution at all. It's not just about cost either. How useful is a car that loses most of its range when it gets below freezing? How useful is a car that that can't be driven for more than a few hours in a row even in perfect conditions?
Ford and GM aren't cutting EV production because they want to. They are doing so because the market is forcing them to. People want reliable vehicles that meet their needs. They don't want to pay a five-figure repair bill for a new battery or because an electric motor failed. Gas-powered cars are not only far more capable, they are cheaper when it comes to acquisition, maintenance, and operating costs. The nexus of spending money on fuel vs. electricity is so far apart that you'll be buying the aforementioned new battery long before you approach any actual savings.
So again, it's worth asking whether EVs have any redeeming qualities in their current iteration. They aren't renewable, relying on toxic chemicals mined by literal child slaves in Africa that eventually require replacement. They are less capable than your average gas-powered vehicle. They typically cost more new but don't hold their value because the batteries are so expensive to replace, meaning buyers get hit coming and going. The list goes on.
Aren't they saving the planet, though? I'd suggest not given they still rely on power largely created by fossil fuels anyway.  So what's the point? All EVs are doing is empowering China, which produces 70 percent of the world's EVs and controls most of the mining of the materials needed to build them. How many billions of dollars are American companies going to continue to throw away pursuing this government-pushed pipedream? The answer is likely quite a few billion more. Eventually, the market always wins, though.

https://twitter.com/JunkScience/status/1748770942724034759?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1748770942724034759%7Ctwgr%5E90b7285d4b89ddb3a5d69e2bd6dd5ccd0458037f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fbonchie%2F2024%2F01%2F20%2Felectric-vehciles-enter-the-total-failure-phase-of-their-existence-n2168989

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2024/01/20/electric-vehciles-enter-the-total-failure-phase-of-their-existence-n2168989

Stellantis’ new Ram pickup is an EV, with a gas-powered generator in case the battery runs out.

(It’s NOT an EV … it’s a type of hybrid at best and basically they’re admitting that an EV is pretty much useless unless you carry a gasoline powered generator with you.)
(HEADS UP: At the end of the article, they mention that Ram is giving up the Hemi: “For the traditional Ram 1500 models, the biggest change is the company is dropping its well-known Hemi V-8. Replacing the current 5.7-liter Hemi engine offered in the truck will be a twin-turbocharged, inline-six-cylinder engine called the Hurricane.”)
Stellantis plans to produce an industry-first pickup for its Ram Trucks brand that’s equipped with an onboard gas engine and electric generator.
The truck can operate as a zero-emissions EV* until the vehicle’s battery dies and an electric onboard generator powered by a 3.6-liter V6 engine kicks on to power the vehicle after its initial charge.
(*There is NO SUCH THING as zero-emission EV. The energy required to PRODUCE an EV outweigh forever the imaginary eco savings in driving one. Do your research.)
Ram CEO Tim Kuniskis characterized the new Ram 1500 Ramcharger pickup as the “ultimate answer for battery-electric trucks.”
    
DETROIT — Automaker Stellantis plans to produce an industry-first electric pickup truck called the Ram 1500 Ramcharger that’s equipped with an electric generator and a gas engine.
If that sounds like an oxymoron, here’s how it works: The truck can operate as a zero-emissions EV until its battery dies and an electric onboard generator, powered by a 27-gallon, 3.6-liter V6 engine, kicks on to power the vehicle.
The outcome is a truck with the benefits of an EV, such as fast acceleration and some zero-emissions (unicorn-powered) driving, without the range anxiety synonymous with most current electric vehicles, according to Ram CEO Tim Kuniskis.
“This is the ultimate answer for the battery-electric truck. No one else has got anything else like it,” Kuniskis told reporters during an event. “This is going to be a game changer for battery-electric trucks.”
The 2025 Ram 1500 Ramcharger is expected to go on sale in late 2024 alongside a previously revealed all-electric Ram 1500 truck without a gas-powered engine or range-extending electric generator.
Stellantis estimates the range of the Ramcharger to be up to 690 miles, including up to 145 miles powered by a 92 kilowatt-hour battery when fully charged without the extended-range power from the gas engine and 130 kilowatt electric generator.
That range compares with up to an expected 500-mile range of the all-electric Ram 1500 REV pickup. It also tops the current Ram 1500, which has a 3.6-liter V-6 engine and an up to 26-gallon tank with a total range of up to 546 miles, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Stellantis did not announce pricing of the Ramcharger, which was revealed Tuesday as part of a redesign of current gasoline-powered Ram 1500 pickups for the 2025 model year.

 

2025 Ram 1500 Ramcharger Tungsten

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/07/new-ram-pickup-ev-has-gas-powered-electric-generator.html

War on Meat: Study Suggests Cigarette-style Climate Warning Labels to Cut Down Meat Consumption.

(FYI, eating meat is much safer than eating bugs.)

Just when you thought it was safe to enjoy a hamburger, a new study from Durham University in the U.K. suggests that cigarette-style graphic warning labels depicting the worst effects of so-called climate change might encourage citizens to consume less meat, which the researchers claim will “improve public health and reduce the UK’s carbon footprint.”

 

I'd LOVE to see what Chloe tastes like ... seared on a hot cast-iron pan with garlic butter and then finished off in the oven to a med-rare ... dayum ...

 
The study, “Impact of pictorial warning labels on meat meal selection: A randomised experimental study with UK meat consumers,” can be read in Appetite, a scientific journal that looks at normal and disordered eating and drinking in animals and humans.
The researchers have an obvious bias against meat consumption, saying it is “deeply ingrained in Western societies.” They made a show out of linking meat-eating to “poorer health outcomes” and even claimed that eating meat was a “contributor to pandemic infections,” but it was clear that climate change was their raison d’être for the study.
“Meat consumption … contributes heavily to deaths from pollution and climate change with meat production in China being linked to 90,000 pollution related deaths and in the United States being linked to nearly 13,000 pollution related deaths,” the study claimed. “Between 12 and 18% of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions can be attributed to the livestock industry.”
The study surveyed 1,001 adults, with participants separated into four groups. Participants were asked to imagine themselves in a cafeteria and choose between four dinner options: meat, fish, vegetarian, and vegan.
One group was shown a warning label with the meat option that showed someone having a heart attack. It read: “Eating meat contributes to poor health.” This warning label caused an 8.8-percent drop in meat meal choices. The second group was shown a label showing a burnt landscape with the admonition, “WARNING: Eating meat contributes to climate change.” This image led 7.4 percent to choose a non-meat option. The third group was shown a pandemic warning and a picture of exotic meat, leading to a 10-percent decrease in meat choices.
Each group was asked to make 20 separate decisions on different meal choices. Three groups were asked how anxiety-provoking and believable they found the warning labels. The fourth group was a control group who were not shown the labels.
Of the groups shown the warning labels, the climate label was found to be the most credible, so climate zealots can rest assured that their fear tactics and propaganda are working on some.
“It is not up to me to speculate or recommend how companies and restaurants use this research,” said lead researcher Jack Hughes of Durham University’s psychology department. “If these were to be implemented in the real world, what our research shows is that putting these warning labels alongside meat options when people are making decisions might be an effective way to reduce the amount of meat people are choosing.”
Although professing that it was not up to him to decide how companies might use his research, Hughes did say that such labeling could be used as part of a national policy to reduce meat consumption.
“As warning labels have already been shown to reduce smoking as well as drinking of sugary drinks and alcohol, using a warning label on meat-containing products could help us achieve this if introduced as national policy,” he said.
Our meat consumption is one of the top targets of the climate cult. According to the UN, “Animal-based foods, especially red meat, dairy, and farmed shrimp, are generally associated with the highest greenhouse gas emissions.”
Naturally, the UN would prefer us to eat more plant-based foods, such as “fruits and vegetables, whole grains, beans, peas, nuts, and lentils.” These options “generally use less energy, land, and water, and have lower greenhouse gas intensities than animal-based foods.” There was no information available for how much emissions insect protein produces.
The UN also states that beef is responsible for 70.6 kg of greenhouse gas emissions per kilogram of actual food produced. Fruits, vegetables and nuts are, supposedly, only responsible for less than 1 kg of emissions per kilogram of food produced.
So, the climate cult isn’t only after our vehicles, our electricity, and our home heating systems, it’s also looking to take away our steaks and hamburgers. A good rule of thumb: If it makes you happy, the climate cult wants to take it away from you.

https://thenewamerican.com/us/environment/war-on-meat-study-suggests-cigarette-style-climate-warning-labels-to-cut-down-meat-consumption/

 The Arc Of The Renewables Universe Is Long, But It Bends Toward Bankruptcy.

Ørsted, a major player in the offshore wind development sector, has decided to pull the plug on its Ocean Wind 1 and Ocean Wind 2 projects off the coast of New Jersey. Citing “escalated financial difficulties and supply chain issues”.
Ørsted’s decision brings to light the tumultuous waters that renewable energy projects are now starting to regularly encounter.
“Macroeconomic factors have changed dramatically over a short period of time, with high inflation, rising interest rates, and supply chain bottlenecks impacting our long-term capital investments,” said David Hardy, group executive vice president and CEO Americas at Ørsted. This statement reflects the vulnerability of such grandiose renewable projects to economic fluctuations and logistical nightmares.
The cancellation of these projects is not just a setback for Ørsted but also dents the ambitious renewable energy goals of the United States. It came shortly after the Biden administration announced the final approval of the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project, which was touted as a significant milestone in the U.S. renewable energy landscape.
Local officials and communities in New Jersey, who had been at loggerheads with Ørsted and other state and federal agencies, welcomed this decision. They had been voicing their concerns and opposition against the potential impacts of the Ocean Wind 1 project.
“This is a great day for the people and businesses of Cape May County,” said Len Desiderio, director of the Cape May County Board of Commissioners, reflecting the relief and vindication felt by the local communities.
Despite this setback, Ørsted continues to express its commitment to the U.S. renewable energy market.
“We remain committed to the U.S. renewable energy market, building clean power that will create jobs across technologies and states from the Northeast to Texas,”
Hardy said. However, the abandonment of the New Jersey projects raises questions about the feasibility and practicality of such commitments in the face of economic and logistical uncertainties.
Ørsted’s decision to abandon its wind projects off New Jersey is a stark reminder of the unpredictable and challenging nature of renewable energy projects. It underscores the need for a more realistic and pragmatic approach towards planning and executing all energy projects, putting engineering and economics ahead of political dictates, taking into consideration the various economic, logistical, and community-related factors that can impact their success.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/11/01/orsted-abandons-new-jersey-wind-projects/

 97 Percent of Scientists Don’t Agree on 'Climate Crisis': Manufacturing Consent - Facts Matter.

I thought this was a very informative interview … the right questions and informative, straight answers.

While the mainstream media around the world leads people to believe that a climate crisis will soon engulf the whole world, (if it hasn’t already) there are some people who’ve looked into the science and data, and … they’re not convinced.
According to Mr. James Taylor (the president of The Heartland Institute) when you examine the facts, and data, it puts the media’s scares into proper perspective, and dispels much of the eco-anxiety that young people across the world experience.
And so, while we were down in Texas, we were able to sit down and speak with James to discuss how consensus is being manufactured around this topic, and what the data truly shows.
Climate Resources:
Climate At A Glance: https://ept.ms/3ScMWsX

https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/97-percent-of-scientists-dont-agree-on-climate-crisis-manufacturing-consent-facts-matter-5517695?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=vigilantf&src_src=partner&src_cmp=vigilantf

Automakers Blast Biden Admin For EV, Fuel Economy Rules.
(I’m NOT in the market for a new vehicle. I have a 2019 RAM 1500 5.7 L extended cab and I hope to drive it for my remaining years. If I were in the market, getting a few miles per gallon extra but paying $3K more, really wouldn’t change my opinion about EV’s … I’ll NEVER own one).

The people who make the vehicles know what they are doing. They know what is coming. Honda and Toyota both saw in 2020 that shipping vehicles and parts across the oceans, especially the Pacific, would be a big problem. Honda stopped making hatchback Civics in the UK. Look at their window stickers and see how much is made in North America now versus how much had been made in Japan previously. So, they know what will happen. They make the damned things
Automakers blast US plan to hike fuel efficiency rules.
A group representing General Motors (GM.N), Toyota Motor (7203.T), Volkswagen (VOWG_p.DE) and nearly all other major automakers on Monday sharply criticized the Biden administration proposal to drastically hike fuel efficiency requirements.
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation said the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) proposal was unreasonable and requested significant revisions.
The industry group argued the plan would boost average vehicle prices by $3,000 by 2032 because of penalties automakers would face for not being in compliance, adding the figure “exceeds reason and will increase costs to the American consumer with absolutely no environmental or fuel savings benefits.”
NHTSA in July proposed boosting requirements by 2% per year for passenger cars and 4% per year for pickup trucks and SUVs from 2027 through 2032, resulting in a fleet-wide average fuel efficiency of 58 miles (93 km) per gallon.
Vehicles are already very pricey post-COVID, with even base models, which are limited production these days, jumping about $3K-$4k.
NHTSA said its rule “is focused on saving Americans money at the gas pump and strengthening American energy independence,” estimating combined benefits of its proposal exceed costs by more than $18 billion.
Automakers also raised alarm at the Energy Department’s proposal to significantly revise how it calculates the petroleum-equivalent fuel economy rating for EVs in NHTSA’s CAFE program, saying it would “devalue the fuel economy of electric vehicles by 72%.”
GM said on Monday it could support NHTSA’s proposal if the Energy Department rescinded its petroleum-equivalent proposal.
Volkswagen, which could face over $800 million in CAFE fines through 2032, said NHTSA’s proposal “is arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of the agency’s discretion to set standards that are not feasible.”
All for an imaginary problem. But, hey, the government is here to help. As mandated by people who do not practice what they preach.

https://www.thepiratescove.us/2023/10/20/automakers-blast-biden-admin-for-ev-fuel-economy-rules/

Moment $200,000 McLaren plug-in hybrid sports car bursts into flames on TEST DRIVE a mile away from motor dealership. (Video at link.)

This is the moment a $200,000 McLaren Artura plug-in hybrid sports car burst into flames during a test drive on Pontefract Road, Stourton, in Leeds. Artura, the supercar manufacturer's first electrified car was engulfed while being taken out for a spin just a mile from the motor dealership.
Images show the scorched wreckage of the plug-in hybrid, which was recalled in the US this year over a fire risk.
The 23-plate car was on a test run with a customer and a showroom worker when it suddenly caught alight. Both passengers escaped unharmed.
The motor - which can race to 60mph in just 2.6 seconds and on to a top speed of 205mph - was around a mile away from the McLaren Leeds dealership.
A spokesman from West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service said: 'We received a call from the driver regarding a hybrid McLaren which went up in flames during its demo drive in Leeds, on the roundabout near the M1 at junction 44.
'We sent crews from Hunslet, which arrived on the scene at 2.35pm. We also sent a Hazardous Material Officer to dispose of the electrical battery. The fire was put out at 3.02pm with no report of injury.'
The Artura is McLaren's first foray into the electric market, featuring a 7.4kWh battery that powers a 94bhp electric motor.
But the supercar, built at McLaren's composite arm in South Yorkshire, has had a shaky start.
The first launch was cancelled at the last minute due to software issues and at the rescheduled event last summer a car caught fire.
Some 164 Arturas, which feature a 3.0-litre twin-turbo V6 engine made in Britain, were recalled in December by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
The cause of the blaze in Leeds, near to junction 44 of the M1, is not known.
In his Sunday Times review, of the car, Grand Tour star Jeremy Clarkson said: 'I'm told that at the press launch there were a number of other problems, including some "thermal powertrain management issues". Which sounds like a "fire" to me.
'But I had a good old poke around in the interior of my test car and have to say it seems to be as well made as a Victorian tunnel.
'It's spacious too. One of the treats about getting old is that you don't bend in places where you used to bend very easily. So getting in and out of a low-slung car is usually funny enough to be a TikTok hit. But the Artura's fine.'

 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12635623/moment-190-000-mclaren-sports-car-bursts-flames-test-drive.html

 More proof that wind power is not a self sustaining proposition.

Offshore Wind Company, Avangrid, Wants To Pay Large Fine To Break Contract In Latest Sign Of Trouble For Industry.

Offshore wind developer Avangrid filed a request to terminate power purchase agreements (PPAs) with Eversource Energy and United Illuminating for its Park City Wind project, which was set for construction off of the Massachusetts coast, according to UtilityDive. Avangrid cited inflation, supply chain backups and higher interest rates as the driving motivations for their termination requests, and the company could stand to pay fines totaling approximately $16 million if the Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) approves the requests.
“One year ago, Avangrid was the first offshore wind developer in the United States to make public the unprecedented economic headwinds facing the industry including record inflation, supply chain disruptions and sharp interest rate hikes, the aggregate impact of which rendered the Park City Wind project unfinanceable under its existing contracts,” the company said in a Monday statement. “After exploring all potential solutions to the financial challenges facing the project, and engaging in good-faith and productive discussions with Connecticut state officials regarding these challenges, it is clear the best path forward for Park City Wind is in the termination of the Power Purchase Agreements and a rebid of the project.
Avangrid paid a previous fine costing $48 million to Massachusetts.
This is despite the fact that the Biden administration, abetted by our representatives, shoveled $7 billion down the wind farm drain.
Previously the administration was trying to sell wind farm leases in the Gulf of Mexico and got NO bites.  Because no one can make any money at it.   
Hopefully all of them will get shut down, because obviously the 'environmentalists' don't care about the whales anymore.
I'd like to see the ones on land all get shut down as well. Useless killing machines.

 

 

Read the rest at:
https://dailycaller.com/2023/10/04/offshore-wind-company-fine-contract-utility-trouble-industry/

I've found that the people screaming and bitching the loudest about the abuses to the environment are the people doing the most damage to the environment. We see it at every political event or protest they go to. You can go to a Trump rally and the place is cleaner after they leave than what it was when they got there. You can go to a liberal event or an environmental rally and the trash left behind is just beyond belief. I've been to enough of both to know what I'm saying is true.

The Connecticut diesel spill is yet another example of so-called green-energy solutions not being so environmentally friendly. It’s easy to point out the hypocrisy of the “green” crusaders who focus solely on greenhouse gas emissions and don’t seem to care about the obvious environmental problems that their “solutions” create.

https://thenewamerican.com/us/green-hypocrisy-1200-gallons-of-diesel-spilled-into-river-in-attempt-to-fuel-wind-project-vessel/

 The 'Climate Emergency' Is A Hoax.
(Long article, but worth the read.)

More than 1,600 scientists, including two Nobel laureates, have signed a declaration saying that "There is no climate emergency."
The declaration is unlikely to get any attention from the mainstream media, unfortunately, but it is important for people to know about: the mass climate hysteria and the destruction of the US economy in the name of climate change need to stop.
"Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific," states the declaration signed by the 1,609 scientists, including Nobel laureates John F. Clauser from the US and Ivar Giaever from Norway/US.
The statement adds:
"Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures...
"The geological archive reveals that Earth's climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.
"Warming is far slower than predicted...
"The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
"Climate policy relies on inadequate models
. Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. They do not only exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases, they also ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial...
"Global warming has not increased natural disasters. 
There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2 mitigation measures are as damag­ing as they are costly.
"Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities. 
There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. Go for adaptation instead of mitigation; adaptation works whatever the causes are."
Professor Steven Koonin, former Undersecretary for Science at the U.S. Department of Energy under the Obama administration, current professor at New York University, and fellow at the Hoover Institution, authored the 2021 bestseller, Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters. In it, he states that what the largely unreadable (for laymen) and complicated science reports say on climate change is completely distorted by the time their contents are filtered through a long line of summary reports of the research by the media and the politicians.

 

"There are abundant opportunities to get things wrong – both accidentally and on purpose – as the information goes through filter after filter to be packaged for various audiences... It's not only the public that is ill-informed about what the science says about climate..."
Koonin adds:
"Government and UN press releases and summaries do not accurately reflect the reports themselves... Distinguished climate experts (including report authors themselves) are embarrassed by some media portrayals of the science."
In a recent interview, Koonin noted that his colleagues' reactions to his book had been that he should not be telling the public or the politicians the truth about climate change.
"I was taught that you tell the whole truth [as a scientist]. And you let the politicians make the value judgments and the cost effectiveness trade-offs and so on," Koonin said. He noted as well the immorality of asking the developing world to cut down emissions when so many do not even have access to electricity, and the immorality of scaring the younger generations: 84% of American teenagers believing, as of January 2022, that if climate change is not addressed, "it will be too late for future generations, making some part of the planet unlivable."
Of course it would be helpful to research what can be done to relieve the problems brought about by man, such as the "hole in the ozone layer," which is now closing, but climate change is not an apocalyptic emergency and needs to be attended to without bringing devastation to the hundreds of millions of people already in extreme poverty.
The Biden administration, however, appears not to be concerned about the widespread poverty and massive starvation that will be caused by the unavailability of cheap and reliable energy in underdeveloped countries, or the inflation caused by the skyrocketing prices that are crushing Americans "barely able to afford one meal a day".
These are man-made problems, created by importing expensive (nearing $100 a barrel again) -- often dirtier -- oil from adversaries of the United States, such as Russia and Venezuela, instead of extracting it far less expensively at home. The Biden administration also does not seem concerned that so long as China and India keep burning coal – the Chinese Communist Party is permitting two new coal-power plants a week, easily cancelling out whatever benefits the US might be providing, and reportedly exceeding "all developed nations combined" in carbon emissions.
The Biden administration also does not seem concerned that it is killing wildlife, sea life and the fishing industry by installing offshore wind turbines along the Atlantic seaboard, or that mandating electric vehicles will throw virtually the entire auto maintenance industry out of work (EVs do not need routine maintenance), or that lithium batteries not only explode but cost thousands of dollars to replace.
The administration even wants military equipment, such as tanks, to be electric, as if there were charging stations in the middle of foreign deserts in the event of a conflict. Moreover, according to NBC News, volcanoes, unimpressed with executive orders, "Dwarf Humans for CO2 Emissions."
The Biden administration does not even bother to act on its own climate findings: In March, the White House released a report about the impact of climate change on the US economy. "Its findings undermine any claims of an ongoing climate crisis or imminent catastrophe" Koonin wrote in July.
"The report's authors should be commended for honestly delivering likely unwelcome messages, even if they didn't make a show of it. The rest of the Biden administration and its climate-activist allies should moderate their apocalyptic rhetoric and cancel the climate crisis accordingly. Exaggerating the magnitude, urgency and certainty of the climate threat encourages ill-considered policies that could be more disruptive and expensive than any change in the climate itself."
But facts will not stop the Biden administration from forging ahead with its radical policies: "I don't think anybody can deny the impact of the climate crisis anymore," Biden, commenting on Hurricane Idalia, told reporters at the White House on August 30. "Just look around. Historic floods. I mean, historic floods. More intense droughts, extreme heat, significant wildfires have caused significant damage."
Never mind that much of climate change is apparently caused by sun flares, about which we can do nothing, and which, unlike commercial industries, do not offer grants; or that major wildfires are, ironically, exacerbated by "environmentalists" for refusing to let tinderbox brush be cleared lest the creatures there be disturbed other than by a wildfire.
Climate expert Bjørn Lomborg suggests that the trillions of dollars needed to address climate change might be put to better use:
"This isn't an argument to do nothing but just to be smarter. To ensure we can transition from fossil fuels, we need to ramp up research and development to innovate down the price of green energy. We should invest across all options including fusion, fission, storage, biofuel and other sources.
Only when green energy is cheaper than fossil fuels will the world be able and willing to make the transition. Otherwise, today's energy prices are just a taste of things to come."

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/climate-emergency-hoax

 South Dakota Regulators Deny Summit Carbon Solutions Permit For Controversial Carbon Capture Project.

On Monday, the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission denied a permit for a controversial carbon capture pipeline in the state. Summit Carbon Solutions (SCS) had filed dozens of eminent domain lawsuits against South Dakota landowners to seize properties that had been in their families for generations.
The carbon technology captures carbon dioxide pollution from ethanol plants, power plants and steel factories, and stores it deep underground. The $5.5 billion Midwest Carbon Express pipeline would have extract carbon from ethanol plants in Iowa and stored it underground in North Dakota.
The Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by Joe Biden last year, massively expanded tax credits for the potentially dangerous carbon capture projects. Last week, Navigator Heartland Greenway, a carbon capture company based in Nebraska, saw its own permit request be denied after weeks of hearings.
The motion to deny was unanimously passed 3-0.
As American Greatness reported earlier this year, SCS went to court to seize the property rights of more than 80 South Dakota landowners because their land was in the path of the company’s planned 2,000-mile carbon capture pipeline.  According to some accounts, surveyors from the company trespassed on the properties and intimidated the farmers with armed security guards.
In an interview in June, Jared Bossly, one of the landowners facing the loss of his property, said that he spoke to Gov. Noem about his situation and her response was “it’s out of my hands … am I supposed to fight all your battles?”
Noem on Friday endorsed former President Trump in the 2024 Republican presidential primary at a campaign rally in Rapid City, drawing speculation that Trump is considering her as his running mate.

 

https://amgreatness.com/2023/09/11/south-dakota-regulators-deny-summit-carbon-solutions-permit-for-controversial-carbon-capture-project/

 New energy bill could see Brits jailed for failing to comply with ‘cultish’ Net Zero regulations.

The proposed Energy Bill has been criticized as an attack on freedom and home ownership.
U.K. businesses and homeowners could be jailed for up to a year or fined £15,000 for non-compliance with new energy efficiency regulations proposed by the Conservative government, which have been described by critics as a “massive expansion of the state and its power over our lives.”
The Energy Bill, which returned to parliament for its third reading this week, outlines several new requirements homeowners must adhere to in relation to Net Zero, the government’s commitment to being carbon neutral by 2050.
For the first time, individuals face criminal charges for failing to comply with measures designed to reduce the country’s carbon footprint.
One such draconian regulation states that household appliances such as fridges, washing machines, and heat pumps must be fitted with smart functions that can be controlled by “any persons carrying out load control,” namely the National Grid, which oversees the majority of electricity transmission and distribution in Britain.
The vast majority of households in the country will not currently comply with the new measures outlined in the bill, meaning homeowners will be compelled to pay out significant sums to transform properties and make them “energy-efficient” or potentially face criminal charges for so-called “non-compliance.”
The bill has angered a number of backbench Conservative MPs who have threatened to rebel against the legislation, with some claiming it is the latest installment in the government’s “cult-like” obsession with Net Zero.
“We cannot impoverish our country to meet some, well, I’d like to call it in some cases almost cultish policy until we can afford it. Until it works, that’s when I think we should adopt all these policies,” said Richard Drax, the Conservative MP for South Dorset.
Others went further, with Tory MP Craig Mackinlay telling the Commons, “I have to say, I absolutely despise this Bill. This is going to be the first time that we are potentially criminalizing people in this country for not being adherent to this new code of Net Zero.”
He urged the government to tread lightly in its proposal to potentially throw fellow citizens in prison for a year “for an unknown offense of the future relating to Net Zero.”
“I’m a Conservative for freedom, not to put people in prison for not adhering to this Net Zero religion,” he said later in an interview with GB News.
Sir John Redwood, more diplomatically, expressed his concern that “by being unduly restrictive and particularly by the threat of civil and even criminal penalties on some of their conduct,” the government risks “antagonizing” the general public.
“Throughout this Bill, we are creating cost and regulation and penalties and obligations. We need to keep people with us and we risk losing them if we put undue burdens on them,” added former Business Secretary Jacob Rees-Mogg.
Commenting on the third reading of the bill by lawmakers on Tuesday, conservative broadcaster Nigel Farage was scathing in his criticism of the legislation.
“There are unbelievably provisions in this bill that would allow for the creation of criminal offenses if businesses and individual householders don’t tell the truth or don’t meet new energy requirements for their houses,” he told viewers.
“It seems to me to be truly extraordinary. You could be prosecuted for providing false information about your house’s energy efficiency,” he added, calling the move a “massive expansion of the state and its power over our lives.”
Energy Minister Andrew Bowie told fellow lawmakers that the bill is “world-leading” legislation that “will deliver for this country cleaner, cheaper, and more secure energy.”

https://summit.news/2023/09/07/new-energy-bill-could-see-brits-jailed-for-failing-to-comply-with-cultish-net-zero-regulations/

 EVs Burst Into Flames After Contact With Saltwater During Hurricane Idalia.

I don’t own an EV, and I have no plans to buy one. Ever. They are super expensive, super heavy, super inconvenient, and now, apparently, super flammable.

Weather.com reports:
Some electric vehicles in Florida are bursting into flames after coming into contact with saltwater. Residual saltwater particles left behind on flooded batteries and battery components can conduct electricity, resulting in short circuits and eventual fires. Safety officials are urging EV owners with vehicles that flooded to take action now as fires can ignite weeks after flooding.
These spontaneous fires can occur up to two weeks after the hurricane’s water surge, so authorities are warning EV owners to park their cars at least 50 feet from any structure.
Hot Air has more:
Owners were being warned to move their EVs at least fifty feet away from any structure. That’s how serious of a fireball can be created. Authorities said that the fires don’t happen immediately, but tend to break out several days or even up to two weeks later. Apparently, as the salt water dries up it can leave behind a trail of salt that can form a “bridge” between the terminals of the EV’s batteries. And if that causes the electricity to arc across, your battery is burning and you’re off to the races.

 
https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2023/09/02/idalia-exposes-yet-another-problem-with-evs-n575436

 Gov DeSantis calls out big climate change LIE on hurricanes like Idalia.

Governor DeSantis called out the big climate change lie today when he was asked about Joe Biden blaming Hurricane Idalia on climate change.
DeSantis start by pointing out the worst hurricane Florida has ever had was nearly 100 years ago and another hurricane that followed the same track as Idalia and had 125mph winds occurred in the late 1800s. He then calls out the climate change liars:

 
https://twitter.com/DeSantisWarRoom/status/1698385115519295519?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1698385115519295519%7Ctwgr%5E20581774fba4a48e0912eeb1c01bdcfad15b1b90%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftherightscoop.com%2Fwatch-gov-desantis-calls-out-big-climate-change-lie-on-hurricanes-like-idalia%2F

“So I think the notion that somehow hurricanes are something new, that’s just false. And we’ve got to stop politicizing the weather and stop politicizing natural disasters. We know from history there have been times where it’s been very busy in Florida, late ’40s and early ’50s. You had a lot of hits of significant hurricanes. I think sometimes people need to take a breath and get a little bit of perspective here.
But the notion that somehow if we just adopt very leftwing policies at the federal level, that somehow we will not have hurricanes, that is a lie. And that is people trying to take what’s happened with different types of storms and use that as a pretext to advance their agenda on the backs of people who are suffering. And that’s wrong and we’re not going to do that in the state of Florida.”

https://therightscoop.com/watch-gov-desantis-calls-out-big-climate-change-lie-on-hurricanes-like-idalia/

Extinction Rebellion, the radical environmentalists who tried to blockade traffic to counterculture festival Burning Man on Sunday — only to be rammed aside by tribal police — are funded by some of the biggest names in Hollywood, along with an heir to the Getty fortune and outdoor retailer Patagonia.
The group calls itself part of a “decentralized, international and politically non-partisan movement” demanding climate action — and until now has largely stuck to causing disruption in Europe.
Under its banner, protesters have superglued themselves to the Speaker’s chair in the British parliament, blockaded busy roads — often by affixing to each other and the asphalt — and even attached themselves to the top of a plane. Allied groups in Europe have vandalized a Walmart heir’s superyacht.
They're being paid by people who travel by private jets frequently ... to protest the use of private jets. This is the elites trying to cull the herd down to the people they want in the club. YOU need to shut up and comply while they spit in your face.