Scott Pruitt don’t care
Scott Pruitt isn’t letting some damn scientific report change his mind about pouring lots more CO² into the atmosphere, because this is America, dammit, we like our air dirty and our warming global.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said a newly released government report that lays most of the blame for the rise of global temperatures to human activity won’t deter him from continuing to roll back the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, a major rule aimed at combating climate change.
“We’re taking the very necessary step to evaluate our authority under the Clean Air Act and we’ll take steps that are required to issue a subsequent rule. That’s our focus,” Pruitt said in an interview with USA TODAY Tuesday. “Does this report have any bearing on that? No it doesn’t. It doesn’t impact the withdrawal and it doesn’t impact the replacement.”
Very wise. More warming is a good thing. It’s November – it’s getting cold around here – who wouldn’t like it to be warmer? Nobody!
President Trump has dismissed climate change as a “hoax” perpetrated by the Chinese to gain a competitive edge over the United States. A champion of the coal industry, Trump has followed through on his vow to undo the climate change agenda implemented under Obama by pulling out of the Paris Accord and withdrawing the Clean Power Plan.
Has Trump paused in his kissing of China’s bum to ask them about the hoax? Or is that all so last week now.
David Doniger, a climate change expert with the Natural Resources Defense Council, criticized the EPA administrator for abandoning the Obama-era rule, saying the Supreme Court has “unequivocally” recognized EPA’s authority to curb carbon pollution under the Clean Air Act.
“The National Climate Assessment has sounded a five-alarm fire bell, and Scott Pruitt pretends he can’t hear it,” he said. “The assessment shows unequivocally that carbon pollution is causing dangerous climate change and that our future depends on whether we cut that pollution.”
The most revealing fact is that these denialists are all also against renewable sources of energy, chiefly solar and wind. That gives their game away.
Even if CO2 did not trap heat the way it does, coal is no longer being made. This tiny ship in space we call Earth has a one-off supply of the stuff, formed in the Carboniferous and Permian mainly, around 300+ million years ago out of the remains of plant species no longer extant. That has to last humanity’s entire future, however long that may be. But the people who have secured property rights to it can’t wait for it all to be converted to CO2 and blown out of smokestacks; simultaneously being converted to $$$ and deposited in their private accounts.
Coal is a resource best used for road tar and as feedstock for the chemical industry. The most profligate use for it is as a fuel; perhaps with the exception of reduction of ores.
Of course, all the above will become irrelevant on the day Jesus returns. (The signs are all there!!)
Aaaargh! Subscript, please.
(Sorry, it just gets to me…)
@Omar: I remember Elon Musk pointing out one time is that because non-renewable resources are – by definition – non-renewable, they’re going to run out at some point. So it’s not a matter of “if” we transition to wholly-renewable energy sources, it’s a matter of “when”.
And if we’re discussing “when”, it’s worth pointing out that in nearly all areas of technology, there is such a thing as first-mover advantage. Leading the pack, and gaining experience that no-one else has yet, gives you a lot of opportunities that won’t be available to latecomers to the industry. Not to mention that if one waits until the last possible minute to play catch-up right before the last of the non-renewables runs out, that mad scramble is probably going to be a lot more expensive than investing steadily in incremental innovation over previous decades would have been.
While we’re being pedantic, Graham Douglas, what you have there is a superscript. I’ve struggled with enough onscreen keyboards to feel lenient towards those who don’t make the effort.
Heh. Sorry. Wordpad gives me superscript 2 but not subscript 2. In future I’ll just make it CO2 and let it go at that.
Karellen @#3:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Blue_Dot
About the most awe-inspiring scientific photo I have ever seen. H/t NASA, Carolyn Porco and the late Carl Sagan. This Earth, the only place in the Universe of ~ 10^24 stars and perhaps 10^25 attendant planets (if our solar system is typical), where we know life in all its glorious variety exists, art is made, science is done, and blogs are commented on.
https://www.space.com/26078-how-many-stars-are-there.html
@Omar: Thanks for the link. I already own the book, which is amazing, but I appreciate the sentiment, and it’s a great link for anyone else to check out. :-) Sagan’s words (quoted in the wikipedia link) about the tragedy that generals and emperors undertake to “become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot” really underscore the utter pettiness and pointlessness of war.
Oh, come on, everyone, that report has 15 chapters in it! Plus appendices. Why would anyone in the Trump administration think it matters? If they did, they might have to read something longer than a tweet.
“If they did, they might have to read something longer than a tweet.”
That would have to be a twoot.