Biden’s leaders summit on climate change was held over two days on April 22nd and April 23rd last week. When you read through this monstrosity(available here) you can’t help but notice all the new agencies that will be formed with their fancy acronyms and how much money(our tax dollars)will be invested in this farce. There are some areas that I found interesting and glaring that really show us how the Biden administration is pushing towards the green new deal full bore. From the leaders summit on climate change’s fact sheet, available at whitehouse.gov, President Biden upped the ante announcing:
The United States Will Target Reducing Emissions by 50-52 Percent by 2030
So, in 9 years we are going to reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuels by 50-52 percent? First of all, how do you realistically and practically apply that. You can’t. I’m not an expert on the geological make up of the earth nor do I have a wealth of knowledge on weather or climate patterns. But what I do have is a load of common sense of what I see around me and how Biden’s administration and his cohorts in the mainstream media like to conflate what is really happening to our planet. It’s called mother nature. I’m not denying that there are people out there who litter or countries that severely pollute(Bangladesh and Pakistan are number 1 and 2 of most polluted countries. You can read the article here from worldpopulationreview.com). On that list, The United States comes in at 85 out of 95 countries of most polluted countries in the world. I think we are doing our part. I recently saw a woman driving in front of me who threw her garbage out of her car and onto the street. Is that bad for the planet? Maybe, but it’s more like…clean up after yourself and stop being so lazy; because what you are doing is adding more work for city workers to clean up. More hours spent cleaning up your litter means we have to pay that person more which means we spend more as a local government. But, is it making the earth warmer? I doubt it. But what Biden’s administration wants to do, in layman’s terms, is tax the hell out of us to conform to these unrealistic goals that are based on nothing but computer generated models. According to the fact sheet from Biden’s leaders summit, they want The United States and the rest of the world to keep a 1.5 degrees celsius(34.7 degrees Fahrenheit to those of us in the real world) limit rise globally:
“Enhancing climate ambition and enabling the transformations required to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. President Biden is galvanizing efforts by the world’s major economies to reduce emissions during this critical period. From reducing short-lived climate pollutants and supporting the most vulnerable to investing in nature-based solutions, these transformational changes are critical to keep a 1.5 degree C limit on global average temperature rise within reach. Just as importantly, they will create new, good-paying jobs today to drive tomorrow’s economy.”
So, is the Earth’s Temperature Rising?
Yes. But is it the fault of man? I’m not convinced of that. If I look at it from a very common sense point of view I would say that the vast population explosions over the past 100 years has caused more CO2 to be expired into the air. Yes, I said expired. With more humans on the planet there is going to be more CO2 expired into the atmosphere. That’s just common sense. So that’s why I’m not convinced that man made, fossil fueled machines are responsible for the increase in the earth’s temperature. I believe it’s a combination of things which includes nature taking its course and more humans on the planet than ever before. The argument from the left is that we need to mitigate global warming in order to save our coastal cities, tropical rain forests, and the Polar bear floating by himself on the last piece of ice in the arctic. And we also can’t forget that hurricanes are going to increase in volume and intensity and cause billions and billions of dollars in damage. Well, yes…that might happen but it’s not because of global warming. The amount of money in damages increases because the cost and amount of homes has increased along the coast. The more expensive buildings you make the more damage monetarily is going to be created if a hurricane comes through and wipes them out. As Ben Shapiro said and I’m paraphrasing, is that people have always learned to adapt and if nature takes its course over the next 100 years, and the sea levels rise the predictable amount of inches or feet, then people will move away from the coast to adapt.
Biden’s Leaders Summit on Climate Change Proposes Launching a Green Government Initiative
When you read this next snippet you should be concerned about your 5th amendment rights and how the government will force you into fighting for global warming:
“Biden’s leaders summit on climate change stated that the Greening Government Initiative launch marks the first international convening on greening national plans for sustainable government operations. Co-chaired by Canada and the United States, GGI countries seek to lead by example in developing and implementing climate action plans that increase the resilience of and mitigate emissions from national government operations and real property. Through coordinating our national priorities and collaborating on common goals, we hope to foster and inspire a global “race to the top” of government efforts toward achievement of the goals of the Paris Agreement. The United States and Canada will lead this initiative through cooperation in the management of national government procurement and real property, helping both nations achieve their individual goals of a net-zero emissions economy, 100 percent clean electricity usage, and a zero-emissions vehicle fleet.”
Management of National Government Procurement and Real Property
That sounds to me like a neat and fancy way of saying a land grab or Federalization of private property to control more of what you own. To make the deal even sweeter they say that this will help The United States and Canada reach a net zero emission economy and a zero emission vehicle fleet? Come on, man you can’t be serious. Do you know how long that is going to take…forever! Not to mention the exorbitant costs of the process to make these new sustainable alternatives. Biden’s leaders summit on climate change went on to propose this:
The United States intends to advance the development and deployment of high integrity sustainable aviation fuels and other clean technologies that meet rigorous international standards, building on existing partnerships, such as through ASCENT– the Aviation Sustainability Center – and pursue policies to increase the supply and demand of sustainable aviation fuels. In the International Civil Aviation Organization, we will engage in processes to advance a new long-term aspirational goal in line with our vision for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the aviation sector, and continue to participate in the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA).
“Currently, Sustainable Fuels Make up Less Than 0.1% of the Total Consumed, but This Number is Expected to Rise Sharply.”
In an article from Wall Street journalist Jon Sindreu, on January 10th 2020, Jon Sindreu stated:
“Currently, sustainable fuels make up less than 0.1% of the total consumed, but this number is expected to rise sharply. If they replaced 100% of conventional jet fuels, emissions from international flights would fall 63% from their expected baseline in 2050, projections by the International Civil Aviation Organization suggest. However, figures collated by Nikita Pavlenko at the International Council on Clean Transportation showing the estimated cost of each type of sustainable fuel once producers have hypothetically ramped up production, suggest that a full transition might well be unfeasibly expensive.”
He continued with a great example of how expensive this process would be:
“Take Hydroprocessed Esters & Fatty Acids or HEFA, made by hydroprocessing vegetable oils or waste fats. These are the cheapest kinds of sustainable aviation fuel, and the ones closest to commercialization. Yet they still cost roughly twice as much as conventional jet fuel. And this gap isn’t likely to close much, since the costs are variable, mostly stemming from the price of commodity inputs.”
We are not going to find any sustainable alternative that is cheaper and, dare I say to the triggered left, more efficient than fossil fuels. The United States is the leader when it comes to technology and how we process our fossil fuels. It is cleaner and more environmentally safer than it has ever been before. Mr. Sindreu added:
“Worse, Mr. Pavlenko’s modeling suggests that many types of HEFA may be even less environmentally friendly than conventional fuel, once the net emission cost of repurposing land to grow the necessary plants is taken into account. Other analysts seem to agree with him.”
Repurposing land? That’s our government repurposing famers’ crops into corn fields to produce ethanol. How’s that been for the prices of your meats and vegetable? But that’s a story for another day. Mr Sindreu concluded with this:
“Although not as distant as electric planes, aviation fuels that are both affordable and sustainable still belong more to the future than the present.” – you can read Jon Sindreu’s entire article here
To say that we can have net zero emissions by 2050 is an extremely lofty goal
But from what I have surmised from Biden’s leaders summit on climate change, that’s exactly what his administration intends to do. Whether we can afford it or not we are going to be forced into this new green deal by hook or by crook. Another excerpt from summit fact sheet stated this:
Joining the Zero Emission Vehicle Transition Council. The United States will join a coalition of governments representing more than half of new vehicle sales globally that is dedicated to accelerating the global transition to zero emission vehicles.
Dedicated to accelerating the global transition to zero emission vehicles? That sounds, again, like the government is going to twist the arms of our big automobile makers into making these vehicles. How would they do that you ask? Well, tax the hell out of cars, SUV’s and trucks that run on fossil fuels. That would be passed onto the buyer making it more expensive to purchase any one of these vehicles thereby forcing the buyer to purchase a “Green New Deal” vehicle. This next one from Biden’s leaders summit deals with International shipping and just had me in tears…laughing that is.
Summit Proposes to Revitalize the Transport Sector by Reducing Emissions From International Shipping
The international shipping sector contributes approximately three percent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the sector’s emissions are only projected to increase. In support of the global effort to keep within reach a 1.5 degree C limit on global average temperature increase, and in support of global efforts to achieve net-zero GHG emissions no later than 2050, the United States is committing to work with countries in the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to adopt a goal of achieving zero emissions from international shipping by 2050 and to adopt ambitious measures that will place the sector on a pathway to achieve this goal.
Really? How are we going to do that? Are we going to have planes and cargo ships running on plant based fuels or electricity. Well, we already know that the electric alternative is way off into the future because it wouldn’t be efficient and the plant based fuel alternative is not feasible as well because it would double the costs of fuel as stated above. So, let’s say they do go with the plant based alternative. Who is going to pay for the increased cost of shipping and delivery as a result of the increased cost of fuel? Well, you and I will. Small businesses and big companies as well would be forced to increase the price of their goods to accommodate the increased price it would be to deliver and ship these goods.
Here’s Another Bloated Idea to Feast Your Eyes On
Establishing a U.S.-India Climate and Clean Energy Agenda 2030 Partnership. The United States is working with allies and partners around the world to set ambitious 2030 targets for climate action and clean energy innovation and deployment. The U.S.-India Climate and Clean Energy Agenda 2030 Partnership will elevate ambitious climate action as a core theme of U.S.-India collaboration and support the achievement of India’s ambitious targets, including reaching 450 GW of renewable energy by 2030. The Partnership will aim to mobilize finance and speed clean energy deployment; demonstrate and scale innovative clean technologies needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across sectors including industry, transportation, power, and buildings; and build capacity to measure, manage, and adapt to the risks of climate-related impacts.
Is This Comic or What?
This is just another way of saying that we are going to invest billions and billions of dollars into countries that could give two craps about being climate aware or compliant. India is one of the worst perpetrators of pollution but now all of a sudden they want to do better? This is just another excuse to give a country money and label it as a good cause. How about we tell these countries to be a little more self reliant and fix the problems in your own country before asking for a handout. Remember the last stimulus that passed. when we gave 25 million dollars to Pakistan for democracy and gender studies. Or, that we gave millions of dollars to Sudan and 500 million to Israel. Our government is constantly spending our tax dollars on ridiculous pet projects and keeping other countries solvent. A lot of the tax dollars that our government spends has nothing to do with helping the American people and only serves to enrich those that are spending our money.
But, alas, I Saved the Best for Last
Biden’s leaders summit on climate change stated that implementing nature-based solutions will promote safety and security at home and abroad. Climate change has been identified by the Department of Defense (DoD) as a critical national security threat and threat multiplier. As a result, DoD has undertaken assessments of the impacts that the climate crisis has on American military instillations. Today the United States is announcing:
- Conducting climate exposure assessments on all U.S. installations. The DoD is announcing a plan to complete climate exposure assessments on all major U.S. installations within 12 months and all major installations outside the continental U.S. within 24 months using the Defense Climate Assessment Tool (DCAT). The DCAT helps identify the climate hazards to which DoD installations are most exposed, which is the first step in addressing the potential physical harm, security impacts, and degradation in readiness resulting from global climate change.
- Supporting assessments in partner countries around the world. The DoD is also announcing its commitment to share the DCAT with a number of attending allied partners and militaries.
What? Climate exposure assessments on military installations. What does that even mean? Does that mean the buildings’ walls have been exposed to too much sun and now need to be repainted with plant based eco friendly paint? The DoD has determined that climate change is a national security threat. Are you kidding me? If that’s the case, and our installations are in danger of succumbing to the threat of a flood, forest fire or other natural disaster, then we don’t really have to worry about our enemies, do we. I mean if it’s that dire already, let nature take its course and bring down those installations. The left hates the military anyway and we would be announcing to our enemies around the globe that our facilities are in danger because of a flood or forest fire…so just wait a little while longer and nature will take care of us for you. Oh, wait we just did announce that to our enemies. And, to make matters worse, we are going to share our DCAT with our global partners. Another way into our defense networks…good job left.
Just another power grab by our government
All in all, Biden’s leaders summit on climate change proposals are just another power grab by the government and another way to say that America sucks and we’re oh so very sorry for existing. Our friends in the main stream media will tout this as such a great step forward to fight climate change, helping heal the wounds that Donald Trump inflicted upon the rest of the world. Yes, they always find a way to interject Trump into the story because they miss blaming him for everything. Al Gore predicted in 2006 in his book An Inconvenient Truth, that sea levels would rise by upwards of 20 feet by 2016(all based on computer generated models). Well, that didn’t happen. I dare to say that the earth is a very unpredictable place and anything can change at a moments notice. But we need to rely more on common sense and rely more on people in the real world and not the government to help give us the answers. The people down on the ground doing the actual work will probably give you better insight than a government bureaucrat that’s been sitting in his basement, making millions of dollars off of his influence for 47 years, and accomplishing nothing.
