As a bitterly cold winter in Britain comes to a close Fraser Nelson in the Daily Telegraph raises an important issue when he points out that in the last ten years:
Some 250,000 Brits have died from the cold, and 10,000 from the heat. It is horribly clear that we have been focusing on the wrong enemy. Instead of making sure energy was affordable, ministers have been trying to make it more expensive, with carbon price floors and emissions trading schemes. Fuel prices have doubled over seven years, forcing millions to choose between heat and food – and government has found itself a major part of the problem.The higher cost of energy due to global warming taxes on energy is killing people! Folks in the U.S. will recall that Obama famously said that cap and trade plans he favors means "electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket." And rates did. We've already seen how high gas prices have gone. Policies designed to drive up the cost of traditional energy sources to make green energy seem more attractive have the biggest negative impact on the poor and those on fixed incomes. The very people that liberals like Obama claim to want to help.
This is slowly beginning to dawn on Ed Davey, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change. He has tried to point the finger at energy companies, but his own department let the truth slip out in the small print of a report released on Wednesday. The average annual fuel bill is expected to have risen by £76 by 2020, it says. But take out Davey’s hidden taxes (carbon price floor, emissions trading scheme, etc) and we’d be paying an average £123 less.
Instead of helping those least able to help themselves Obama and his friends are creating massively expensive green energy programs that don't supply affordable energy but do, thanks to subsidies from Obama, enrich the brokers and traders who create the green market. Even when as dozens of these firms go bankrupt, Obama's green buddies get their cut.
Climate Change Zealots Admit Warming Stopped
Even as the green juggernaut, fueled by taxpayer dollars, continues the science on which it is based is becoming increasingly unsettled. An article in the respected British journal The Economist (a formerly pro-warmer publican) now begins to chip away at the notion that the science is settled and the only question is how fast we can raise taxes in a vain effort to limit carbon emission. The Australian summarizes the article below:
The fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.Two weeks ago I shared a chart cited in the Economist article along with a chart showing the continued increase in CO2 matched with a flattening temperature curve. Anyone with an ounce of scientific integrity can see that the models which predicted significant temperature increase based on CO2 were wrong.
Research by Ed Hawkins of University of Reading shows surface temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the range projections derived from 20 climate models and if they remain flat, they will fall outside the models' range within a few years.
"The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.
"If we have not passed it already, we are on the threshold of global observations becoming incompatible with the consensus theory of climate change," he says.
Whitehouse argues that whatever has happened to make temperatures remain constant requires an explanation because the pause in temperature rise has occurred despite a sharp increase in global carbon emissions.
The Economist says the world has added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010, about one-quarter of all the carbon dioxide put there by humans since 1750. This mismatch between rising greenhouse gas emissions and not-rising temperatures is among the biggest puzzles in climate science just now, The Economist article says.
An increasing body of research that suggests it may be that climate is responding to higher concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide in ways that had not been properly understood before.
"This possibility, if true, could have profound significance both for climate science and for environmental and social policy."
But despite this news, another article in the March 30 Daily Beast is full speed ahead on the global catastrophe scare train. And the suggested remedy is more taxes on carbon which increases the cost of energy for everyone, but particularly the poor. Why the disconnect? Easy. Follow the money. The rich one percenters are eager to siphon off more of hard earned money. Forget that not one of these carbon taxes or green schemes will have the slightest impact on climate.
The left's green energy scam is forcing the poor to choose between food and fuel with disastrous consequences. These latest realizations that carbon is not a primary driver of climate change won't stop the scammers. There's too much green at stake for them and their friends!
Just think about the trillions worldwide that are being wasted and misdirected into unnecessary green projects and carbon taxes. Think of all the REAL human suffering that could be alleviated with those resources. Instead, we are enriching greenies with nothing to show for it but their increasing wealth at our expense!