Showing posts with label green reelection fund scam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label green reelection fund scam. Show all posts

Sunday, June 29, 2014

Canucks pulls the plug on the U.S. Keystone Pipeline – will send oil to Asia.


Canucks pulls the plug on the U.S. Keystone Pipeline – will send oil to Asia. HT: WUWT.
HT:  Breitbart.

Obama’s inability to make a decision on Keystone has finally yielded a result – Canada has made the decision for him.

Breitbart reports Canada has just approved the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project – a major pipeline to ship Canadian oil to Asia.
The Canadian oil will still be burnt – in Asia, instead of America.

All the jobs and energy security which Canadian oil could have delivered to America, will instead be delivered to Asia.

Rather than purchasing crude from a friendly and allied neighbor, the United States will most likely need to continue its reliance upon hostile sources like Venezuela.

Energy analysts had hoped that construction of Keystone could have replaced almost half of the current U.S. daily crude purchases from that volatile, anti-American dictatorship, depriving Venezuela of the resources it relies upon to stay in power and fund its Cuban allies.

You can’t say Canada didn’t give America a chance – they waited years for the American administration to come to their senses. But in the end, they couldn’t wait any longer, and have put the interests of Canadians first.

Below is a helpful timeline of Keystone events, courtesy of Al Jazeera.
http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/the-stream/multimedia/2013/multimedia/2013/12/a-history-of-keystonetimeline.html

Saturday, February 1, 2014

Keystone XL oil pipeline gets green light from State Department.


Keystone XL oil pipeline gets green light from State Department.HT: WUWT.


Keith Sketchley writes: Today the US State Department reported ‘no major environmental objections to the proposed $7 billion Keystone pipeline’. I wonder what Obamas and Kerrys reasons for further delay will be now?

WASHINGTON (AP) — The long-delayed Keystone XL oil pipeline cleared a major hurdle toward approval Friday, a serious blow to environmentalists’ hopes that President Barack Obama will block the controversial project running more than 1,000 miles from Canada through the heart of the U.S.

The State Department reported no major environmental objections to the proposed $7 billion pipeline, which has become a symbol of the political debate over climate change.Read the full story here.

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Europe - Green Fade-Out: Europe to Ditch Climate Protection Goals.


Europe - Green Fade-Out: Europe to Ditch Climate Protection Goals.HT: Spiegel.
The climate between Brussels and Berlin is polluted, something European Commission officials attribute, among other things, to the "reckless" way German Chancellor Angela Merkel blocked stricter exhaust emissions during her re-election campaign to placate domestic automotive manufacturers like Daimler and BMW
This kind of blatant self-interest, officials complained at the time, is poisoning the climate.
But now it seems that the climate is no longer of much importance to the European Commission, the EU's executive branch, either. Commission sources have long been hinting that the body intends to move away from ambitious climate protection goals. On Tuesday, the Süddeutsche Zeitung reported as much.

At the request of Commission President José Manuel Barroso, EU member states are no longer to receive specific guidelines for the development of renewable energy

The stated aim of increasing the share of green energy across the EU to up to 27 percent will hold. But how seriously countries tackle this project will no longer be regulated within the plan.

As of 2020 at the latest -- when the current commitment to further increase the share of green energy expires -- climate protection in the EU will apparently be pursued on a voluntary basis.Hmmmm.....You can't compete while using 'green energy'......period.Read the full story here.

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Fisker Karma files for bankruptcy, U.S. Taxpayer looses another 139 Million Dollar? OBAMA ‘STIMULUS INVESTMENT’.


Finnish automaker files for bankruptcy, U.S. Taxpayer looses another 139 Million Dollar OBAMA ‘STIMULUS INVESTMENT.HT: GreenAutoblog.
After 18 months of not building any vehicles, plug-in vehicle company Fisker finally threw in the Chapter 11 towel today, filing for bankruptcy protection. 
The Department of Energy sold its Fisker assets to Hybrid Tech Holdings LLC for $25 million, at a reported $139-million loss. Other reports say the DOE invested $192 million in Fisker, and only got around $53 million back. The DOE put Fisker up for auction last month. Fisker also apparently owes creditors up to a billion dollars. Whatever the exact figures, the point is that the Fisker saga now enters a new phase.Hmmmm.....I thought it was more like HALF A BILLION TAXPAYER MONEY.

Related:

Justin Bieber's new birthday 'TOY' - A Fisker Karma Car Costs $112,000, but Costs Taxpayers $529,000,000.

Fisker Automotive, a California based company with an Al Gore venture capital firm connection was given a $529 million loan from the Department of Energy to provide manufacturing jobs and produce these high-tech electric cars.
But there is only one problem — the cars are built in Finland.
Why Finland?
Here is the answer provided by Fisker Automotive company founder Henri Fisker. “There was no contract manufacturer in the U.S. that could actually produce our vehicle,” he told ABC News, “They don’t exist here.”
Given the dismal state of U.S. manufacturing, Fisker’s statement does not surprise me. But what does surprise and infuriate me is $529 million of our hard earned tax money went into building this lavish product that only one half of one percent of our population could ever dream of driving.
Tuesday night when President Obama gave his State of the Union message he conveniently forgot to include this tawdry tale of economic excellence in his “America is Back” themed speech.
Obama-nomics means the smallest fraction of the population — the same ones Obama says need to pay more taxes — now have the opportunity to pay $112,000 for sporty new set of electric wheels. Meanwhile, the rest of us already paid $529 million for a car we have never heard of, let alone can afford, while the Fins got the jobs.Hmmmm.......'Cheap' advertising ...."Leanardo Di Caprio and Justin Bieber".Read the full story here.


Sunday, August 18, 2013

Is The world On the threshold of a Little Ice Age?

Hendrik Willem Schweickardt - Skaters on a Frozen Canal.

Is The world On the threshold of a Little Ice Age?HT: IceAgeNow.

A Little Ice Age is predicted based on solar patterns. It could be the equivalent of a nuclear winter, says Len Maier, president of Friends of Science. “At such a time, an abundance of carbon dioxide (CO2) would be a benefit. CO2 helps crops grow.

“On the threshold of a mini-Maunder event”
In that article he quotes NASA’s Science News report for January 8, 2013,
“Indeed, the sun could be on the threshold of a mini-Maunder event right now. Ongoing Solar Cycle 24 [the current short term 11 year cycle] is the weakest in more than 50 years. Moreover, there is (controversial) evidence of a long-term weakening trend in the magnetic field strength of sunspots. Matt Penn and William Livingston of the National Solar Observatory predict that by the time Solar Cycle 25 arrives, magnetic fields on the sun will be so weak that few if any sunspots will be formed. Independent lines of research involving helioseismology and surface polar fields tend to support their conclusion.”
“That is even more significant,” says Ferrara, “because NASA’s climate science has been controlled for years by global warming hysteric James Hansen, who recently announced his retirement.”
“This same concern is increasingly being echoed worldwide,” Ferrara continues, quoting from The Voice of Russia on April 22, 2013,
“Global warming which has been the subject of so many discussions in recent years, may give way to global cooling. According to scientists from the Pulkovo Observatory in St.Petersburg, solar activity is waning, so the average yearly temperature will begin to decline as well. Scientists from Britain and the US chime in saying that forecasts for global cooling are far from groundless.”
“Another Little Ice Age”

That report quoted Yuri Nagovitsyn of the Pulkovo Observatory saying, “Evidently, solar activity is on the decrease. The 11-year cycle doesn’t bring about considerable climate change – only 1-2%. The impact of the 200-year cycle is greater – up to 50%. In this respect, we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years.” In other words, another Little Ice Age.
The German Herald reported on March 31, 2013,
“German meteorologists say that the start of 2013 is now the coldest in 208 years – and now German media has quoted Russian scientist Dr Habibullo Abdussamatov from the St. Petersburg Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory [saying this] is proof as he said earlier that we are heading for a “Mini Ice Age.” Talking to German media the scientist who first made his prediction in 2005 said that after studying sunspots and their relationship with climate change on Earth, we are now on an ‘unavoidable advance towards a deep temperature drop.’”
“Faith in Global Warming is collapsing…”


Read all of this very comprehensive article. It’s really worth the read.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/05/26/to-the-horror-of-global-warming-alarmists-global-cooling-is-here/


Sunday, August 11, 2013

"For the Population Their Sake" - Europe Pulls The Plug On Its Green Energy.


"For the Population Their Sake" - Europe Pulls The Plug On Its Green Energy.HT: The Australian.By Benny Peiser.

As country after country abandons, curtails or reneges on once-generous support for renewable energy, Europe is beginning to realise that its green energy strategy is dying on the vine. Green dreams are giving way to hard economic realities.

Slowly but gradually, Europe is awakening to a green energy crisis, an economic and political debacle that is entirely self-inflicted.
The mainstream media, which used to encourage the renewables push enthusiastically, is beginning to sober up too. With more and more cracks beginning to appear, many newspapers are returning to their proper role as the fourth estate, exposing the pitfalls of Europe’s green-energy gamble and opening their pages for thorough analysis and debate. Today, European media is full of news and commentary about the problems of an ill-conceived strategy that is becoming increasingly shaky and divisive.
A study by British public relations consultancy CCGroup analysed 138 articles about renewables published during July last year in the five most widely circulated British national newspapers: The Sun, The Times, The Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail and Daily Mirror, which enjoy a combined daily circulation of about 6.5 million.
“The analysis revealed a number of trends in the reporting of renewable energy news,” the study found. “First and foremost, the temperature of the media’s sentiment toward the renewables industry is cold. More than 51 per cent of the 138 articles analysed were either negative or very negative toward the industry.”
”More than 80 per cent of the articles appeared in broadsheet titles The Times, The Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail, the report says, “but 55 per cent of these articles were either negative or very negative about the industry."
EU members states have spent about €600 billion ($882bn) on renewable energy projects since 2005, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Germany’s green energy transition alone may cost consumers up to €1 trillion by 2030, the German government recently warned.
These hundreds of billions are being paid by ordinary families and small and medium-sized businesses in what is undoubtedly one of the biggest wealth transfers from poor to rich in modern European history. Rising energy bills are dampening consumers’ spending, a poisonous development for a Continent struggling with a severe economic and financial crisis.
The German Association of Energy Consumers estimates that up to 800,000 Germans have had their power cut off because they couldn’t pay the country’s rising electricity bills; among them, German newspaper Der Spiegel reported last October, are 200,000 long-term unemployed.
As The Washington Post writer Charles Lane observed at the time: “It’s one thing to lose your job because a competing firm built a superior mouse trap; it’s quite another, justice-wise, to lose it because a competitor talked the government into taking its side.”
Two weeks ago, the Czech government decided to end all subsidies for new renewable energy projects at the end of this year. “The reason for this law amendment is the rising financial burden for electricity consumers,” Prime Minister Jiri Rusnok said. “It threatens the competitiveness of our industry and raises consumers’ uncertainty about power prices.” In recent years, almost all EU member states also have begun the process of rolling back and cutting green subsidies.
Spain is a particularly cautionary tale. By failing to control the cost of guaranteed subsidies, the country has been saddled with €126bn of obligations to renewable-energy investors.
Now that the Spanish government has dramatically curtailed these subsidies, even retrospectively, more than 50,000 solar entrepreneurs face financial disaster and bankruptcy.
Germany, however, is the nation that has pushed the renewables agenda furthest and is struggling most with the unintended damage of the green energy shift, its so-called Energiewende.
Germany’s renewable energy levy, which subsidises green energy production, rose from €14bn to €20bn in just one year as a result of the fierce expansion of wind and solar power projects. Since the introduction of the levy in 2000, the electricity bill of German consumers has doubled.
German households will pay a renewables surcharge of €7.2bn this year alone. In addition, consumers will be affected by indirect costs because industry, trade and commerce pass on their rising energy costs in product prices. And because green energy subsidies are guaranteed for 20 years, the costs threaten to rise exorbitantly as more schemes are being agreed. Energy bills are going through the roof, fuel poverty is rising and renewable energy policies face a growing public backlash. What is more, governments are increasingly concerned about the threat to Europe’s industrial base.
Germany has the most expensive electricity in Europe, with an average price of 26.8 euro cents (40c) a kilowatt hour. No wonder Chancellor Angela Merkel has warned that the rapid expansion of green energy programs is weakening Germany’s competitive advantage in the global economy.
The EU also is quietly rolling back its renewable agenda, which EU leaders now recognise has been raising energy prices across the Continent. At their summit in Brussels in May, leaders indicated that they intended to prioritise the issue of affordable energy over cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
The EU summit signalled Europe intended to restore its declining competitiveness by supporting the development of cheap energy, including shale gas, while cutting green energy subsidies.
However, EU environment ministers are alarmed at the prospective rollback. They are seeking to prevent the development of EU shale resources by trying to introduce EU-wide environmental barriers.
Until recently, Europe had positioned itself as the global leader in climate protection and renewable energy, with Germany leading the way with ambitious targets and generous subsidies that boosted solar power and wind energy.
More than half of the world’s solar panels are installed in Germany. On June 6, Germany’s solar power production touched a new record of 23.4 gigawatts, meeting almost 40 per cent of the country’s entire peak electricity demand. But to understand that this record is quite meaningless, consider the grid’s narrow escape last winter. For many weeks in December and January, Germany’s 1.1 million solar power systems generated almost no electricity. During much of those overcast winter months, solar panels more or less stopped generating electricity. To prevent blackouts, grid operators had to import nuclear energy from France and the Czech Republic and power up an old oil-fired power plant in Austria.
Subsidies are extremely generous and guarantee investors an almost 10 per cent annual return for 20 years. Given such an unparalleled offer, it is not surprising that more than a million families already have installed solar panels. This solar boom, however, has saddled the country with obligations of more than €130bn in subsidies, leading to ever increasing energy prices.
As wealthy homeowners and businesses owners install solar panels on their homes and commercial buildings, low-income families, living in rented apartments, have to foot skyrocketing electric bills. Many can no longer afford to pay, so the utilities are cutting off their power.
To stop the solar boom, the government has reduced feed-in tariffs for photovoltaic schemes in the past few years. Since 2010, however, more than 5000 companies involved in the solar business have closed, shedding tens of thousands of green jobs.
Germany’s biggest companies, such as Siemens and Bosch, are abandoning the industry too. Their renewable energy strategies resulted in costly debacles. Siemens, Europe’s largest engineering company, announced in June that it would close its entire solar division, at a loss of about €1bn. Last month the Siemens board fired its chief executive, Peter Loescher. His dramatic dumping was seen in the context of a catalogue of disastrous misinvestments in the green energy sector he presided over.
For Bosch, another German giant, its move into solar ended in disaster too, costing the electronics company even more than Siemens: about €2.4bn.
During the past year, the wave of bankruptcies in solar has devastated the entire industry, while solar investors have lost almost €25bn on the stockmarket.
Now Germany plans to phase out subsidies altogether, its solar industry is likely to disappear by the end of the decade.
Most observers were convinced the energy gap caused by Germany’s decision, two years ago, to phase out nuclear power would be filled by wind and solar power. Hardly anyone realised that the extraordinary boom in renewable energy construction would generate a coal boom too.
In fact, German CO2 emissions have been rising for two years in a row as coal is experiencing a renaissance. But CO2 emissions in the EU as a whole are likely to rise because of increased coal burning at power stations. The revelation has embarrassed the German government and dumbfounded the public, which cannot understand how a nation that has expanded renewable energy more than any other country is building 20 coal-fired power stations.
In much of Europe, coal has become much cheaper than natural gas for power generators. The reason is the collapse of the EU’s emissions trading scheme and the subsequent decline in carbon prices, which make coal plants more economical than gas-fired power plants.
So far Europe’s emissions trading scheme has cost consumers more than €300bn. Massive amounts of green investments originally projected on the back of a high carbon price have been shelved and are no longer feasible. There can be little doubt Europe’s flagship climate policy has turned into an utter failure. In a realistic assessment of Europe’s policy shift, the International Energy Agency recently noted that “climate change has quite frankly slipped to the backburner of policy priorities”.
Of all the unintended consequences of Germany’s Energiewende perhaps the most extraordinary is the detrimental effect of wind and solar schemes on the price of electricity generated by natural gas. Almost 20 per cent of gas power plants in Germany have become unprofitable and face shutdown as renewables flood the electricity grid with preferential energy. To avoid blackouts, the government has had to subsidise uneconomic gas and coal power stations so that they can be used as back-up when the sun is not shining, the wind does not blow and renewables fail to generate sufficient electricity.
The mess is forcing struggling utilities to contemplate even more radical solutions. E.ON, Germany’s biggest energy company, is thinking of dismantling some of its European gas power plants, mothballed because they are no longer profitable, and relocating them outside the EU. Such farcical considerations become symptomatic of the unintended consequences caused by the rapid expansion of renewable energy.
Europe’s manufacturers are rapidly losing ground to international competition. Instead of putting money into the energy-expensive EU, investors are pouring money into the US, where energy prices have fallen to one-third of those in the EU, thanks to the shale gas revolution.
The naive assumption of policymakers that Europe’s main competitors would follow the shift from cheap fossil fuels to expensive green energy has not materialised. Europe, The Washington Post recently warned, “has become a green-energy basket case. Instead of a model for the world to emulate, Europe has become a model of what not to do.”
Europe’s strategy was founded on two fears: first, that global warming was an urgent threat that needed to be prevented imminently and at all costs; and second, that the world was running out of fossil fuels, which meant oil and gas would become ever more expensive. Both conjectures, however, turned out to be wrong.
The result of a fear-driven gamble with the Continent’s industrial future is a costly shambles that threatens to undercut Europe’s economic and political position in a world that is sensibly refusing to follow its lead.
Germany’s green energy strategy is likely to change significantly after federal elections on September 22; Merkel has promised voters to drastically curtail the €20bn burden they have to pay renewable energy investors every year should she win.
Australians would be well advised to watch this green train wreck very closely if they wish to avoid a repeat of the fiasco that is unfolding in Europe.
Benny Peiser is director of the London-based Global Warming Policy Foundation.

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Weather and climate experts from across the UK came together at the Met Office's HQ to discuss the recent run of unusual seasons in Europe.

"Extracting The Stone Of Madness"by Hieronymus Bosch

Weather and climate experts from across the UK came together at the Met Office's HQ to discuss the recent run of unusual seasons in Europe.HT: Wattsupwiththat

Weather and climate experts from across the UK came together at the Met Office's HQ 

It was arranged to include the best climatologists and meteorologists to gain better understanding of the ‘disappointing UK weather over recent years’.

Now, that the AGW debate with regard to the relationship between CO2 and temperature has been shown to be insignificant, I can only imagine the next course of action. Listening to Roger harbinger of doom on BBC Radio 4 this morning; weird weather, extremes this and that…blah blah!

I thought I would have a look and see how unusual (oops! disappointing) it has been for the last 14.5 years at a southern UK location.

Daily (24 hrs) maximum temperatures Slightly COOLER, oh dear there goes the CO2 driving temperature rise theory!




Daily (24hrs) average temperatures Slightly COOLER, so it’s lower maximum temperatures driving the average down! And still CO2 levels continue to rise.

There has been less hours of sunlight.

I know the comments have been a bit cynical and light hearted but honestly where is the gloom, the doom, the despondency and catastrophe in 14.5 years of perfectly normal very stable weather.

On a last note, I think we can all agree the Earth has been, at stages in its past history, covered or mostly covered in glacial ice. Most people will agree that global temperatures have been much higher than today, based on paleo-geology and archaeology. Well I suggest, in very simplistic terms, the difference between the two extremes of cold and hotter, is natural variation. Is climate change real? – isn’t the change between the wide divergence of natural variation, stating the obvious.

Finally from the Met Office:

There are a number of possible factors which could be 'loading the dice', including declining Arctic sea ice, solar variability, long-term ocean cycles, and other long-term cycles of natural variability.

"Six out of the last seven UK summers have seen above average rainfall (2010 is the exception, with average rainfall) and the workshop heard new evidence from the University of Reading suggesting that long-term Atlantic currents may be playing an important role.

These are understood to operate on cycles of a decade or more, which suggests that we may see their influence on our summers for a few more years to come.

Hmmmm......Europeans better invest in an 'All-Burner' for the coming Winters.Read the full story here.

Thursday, June 13, 2013

Obama Quietly Raises 'Carbon Price' as Costs to Climate Increase


Obama Quietly Raises 'Carbon Price' as Costs to Climate Increase. (Bloomberg).
Buried in a little-noticed rule on microwave ovens is a change in the U.S. government’s accounting for carbon emissions that could have wide-ranging implications for everything from power plants to the Keystone XL pipeline.
The increase of the so-called social cost of carbon, to $38 a metric ton in 2015 from $23.80, adjusts the calculation the government uses to weigh costs and benefits of proposed regulations. The figure is meant to approximate losses from global warming such as flood damage and diminished crops. 

With the change, government actions that lead to cuts in emissions -- anything from new mileage standards to clean-energy loans -- will appear more valuable in its cost-benefit analyses. On the flip side, environmentalists urge that it be used to judge projects that could lead to more carbon pollution, such as TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone pipeline or coal-mining by companies such as Peabody Energy Corp. (BTU) on public lands, which would be viewed as more costly.

As we learn that climate damage is worse and worse, there is no direction they could go but up,” Laurie Johnson, chief economist for climate at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in an interview. Johnson says the administration should go further; she estimates the carbon cost could be as much as $266 a ton.
Even supporters questioned the way the administration slipped the policy out without first opening it for public comment. The change was buried in an afternoon announcement on May 31 about efficiency standards for microwave ovens, a rule not seen as groundbreaking.

This is a very strange way to make policy about something this important,” Frank Ackerman, an economist at Tufts University who published a book about the economics of global warming, said in an interview. The Obama administration “hasn’t always leveled with us about what is happening behind closed doors.”
Industry representatives are equally puzzled.

It’s a pretty important move. To do this without any outside participation is bizarre,” said Jeff Holmstead, a lawyer at Bracewell & Giuliani LLP (1222L) representing coal-dependent power producers and other industry groups. A legal challenge to the determination would be difficult, but could be tried by itself or in a challenge to a specific rulemaking that uses the cost, he said.Read the full story here.

Meanwhile :

 Hmmmm.......No significant warming for 17 years 4 months.

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley.

As Anthony and others have pointed out, even the New York Times has at last been constrained to admit what Dr. Pachauri of the IPCC was constrained to admit some months ago. There has been no global warming statistically distinguishable from zero for getting on for two decades.

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

DOE Green Energy Loans: $11.45 million per job and a rounding error’s worth of averted carbon emissions.


DOE Green Energy Loans: $11.45 million per job and a rounding error’s worth of averted carbon emissions.HT: Wattsupwiththat. By David Middleton

The cost of each taxpayer-financed green energy job created since 2009:

$26.32 billion divided by 2,298 jobs = $11.45 million per job…

Green energy jobs and DOE loans are tallied under programs 1703 and 1705 on this list.

Permanent jobs created: 2,298

Taxpayer financed loan guarantees: $26.33 billion

19 of the projects cost more than $10 million per permanent job…

Even if you use the Obama maldaministration’s accounting methods and include temporary employment, the totally idiotic “jobs created/saved” category and include the 33,000 Ford Motor Company jobs “saved”, you get ~60,000 jobs at a cost of $34.5 billion –> $580,000 per job.

Bear in mind that Mr. Obama promised “to create 5 million jobs over 10 years by directing taxpayer funds toward renewable energy projects.” He’s currently 4,997,702 short of the 5 million mark.

I have handy cost estimates for three of the solar plants near the top of the list of $10 million-plus jobs. If I factor in the increased cost of electricity, the cost per permanent job literally skyrockets, as promised by candidate Obama in 2008.

The total cost to the economy per permanent “green energy” job created by these three solar PV plants is $82.3 million. If I add in the 2,450 temporary construction jobs that were created, the cost per job drops to $2.8 million per job. Hmmmm.......Obama: "All the Choices We've Made Have Been the Right Ones"Read and see the full story here.


Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Obama 'Admin' knew electric car maker Fisker was faltering.


Obama 'Admin' knew electric car maker Fisker was faltering.(CBS).Newly obtained documents show the Obama administration was warned as early as 2010 that electric car maker Fisker Automotive Inc. was not meeting milestones set up for a half-billion dollar government loan, nearly a year before U.S. officials froze the loan after questions were raised about the company's statements.

An Energy Department official said in a June 2010 email that Fisker's bid to draw on the federal loan may be jeopardized for failure to meet goals established by the department.

Despite that warning, Fisker continued to receive money until June 2011, when the DOE halted further funding. The agency did so after Fisker presented new information that called into question whether key milestones -- including the launch of the company's signature, $100,000 Karma hybrid -- had been achieved, according to a credit report prepared by the Energy Department.

The December 2011 credit report said "DOE staff asked questions about the delays" in the launch of the Karma "and received varied and incomplete explanations," leading to the suspension of the loan.

Fisker had received a total of $192 million of the $529 million loan before it was suspended.

In the June 2010 email, Sandra Claghorn, an official in the DOE's loan program office, had written that Fisker "may be in limbo due to a lack of compliance with financial covenants" set up by the Energy Department to protect taxpayers in the event of default. Another document, from April 2010, listed milestones that Fisker had not yet met.

Vice President Joe Biden announced in late 2009 that Fisker would reopen a shuttered former General Motors factory in Wilmington, Del., to produce plug-in, electric hybrid vehicles. The plant was never completed and never produced any cars.

Fisker said the company was hurt badly by the 2008 recession and by the bankruptcy of A123 Systems, a Massachusetts company hired by Fisker to make batteries for the Karma. A bankruptcy judge granted Fisker $15 million in a claim against A123 for breach of warranty, a fraction of Fisker's initial claim.

Fisker has not built a vehicle since last summer and has failed to secure a buyer as its cash reserves have dwindled.Hmmmm.....Obama: "All the Choices We've Made Have Been the Right Ones".....Makes a nice motto for the Post United States of America, doesn’t it?Read the full story here.

Tuesday, April 2, 2013

Video - Global Warming - "Africans for Norway".



Global Warming  - "Africans for Norway".HT: IceAgeNowAfricans for Norway

James Hansen to leave NASA to fight 'Global Warming'.


James Hansen to leave NASA to fight 'Global Warming'.(WUWT). At the same time, retirement will allow Dr. Hansen to press his cause in court. He plans to take a more active role in lawsuits challenging the federal and state governments over their failure to limit emissions, for instance, as well as in fighting the development in Canada of a particularly dirty form of oil extracted from tar sands.

As a government employee, you can’t testify against the government,” he said in an interview.…

In the interview and in subsequent e-mails, Dr. Hansen made it clear that his new independence would allow him to take steps he could not have taken as a government employee. He plans to lobby European leaders — who are among the most concerned about climate change — to impose a tax on oil derived from tar sands. Its extraction results in greater greenhouse emissions than conventional oil. …

Dr. Hansen says he senses the beginnings of a mass movement on climate change, led by young people. Once he finishes his final papers as a NASA employee, he intends to give it his full support.

At my age,” he said, “I am not worried about having an arrest record.”Hmmmm....."He plans to lobby European leaders — who are among the most concerned about climate change — to impose a tax on oil derived from tar sands."Don't worry the Chinese will be all to happy to buy the 'Tar sands oil'.Read the full story here.



Sunday, March 31, 2013

Russian Scientist predicts earth is heading for another Ice Age.

Little ice age 1650 - 1850

Russian Scientist predicts earth is heading for another Ice Age.(Express).
Incredibly, British Summer Time officially starts tomorrow but millions of brassed off Brits pining for warmth will have to endure freezing temperatures and biting winds until May.The misery will continue with daytime temperatures struggling to reach a bracing 5C (41F). The only ray of sunshine, forecasters said, is that it will stay dry.

As if the outlook wasn’t bleak enough already, meteorologists believe the shivering start to 2013 has been the coldest in more than 200 years.

More worryingly, the combination of sub-zero temperatures and heavy snow experienced across much of the country recently could be the prelude to a new Ice Age that will begin next year and last for 200 years.

Russian scientist Dr Habibullo Abdussamatov, of the St Petersburg Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory, painted the Doomsday scenario saying the recent inclement weather simply proved we were heading towards a frozen planet.

Dr Abdussamatov believes Earth was on an “unavoidable advance towards a deep temperature drop”. The last big freeze, known as the Little Ice Age, was between 1650 and 1850.

Today he said: “The last global decrease of temperature (the most cold phase of the Little Ice Age) was observed in Europe, North America and Greenland.“All channels in the Netherlands were frozen, glaciers were on the advance in Greenland and people were forced to leave their settlements, inhabited for several centuries.

The Thames river in London and Seine in Paris were frozen over every year. Humanity has always been prospering during the warm periods and suffering during the cold ones. The climate has never been and will never be stable.”

The miserable weather since the turn of the year has been blamed on two episodes of high pressure.
A poorly positioned jet stream means ice cold temperatures and the continuing risk of snow showers across the north and east.Almost all of the UK can expect a continuation of night frost, which will turn severe at times.

April is forecast to be a drier than average month in the north and east, slightly wetter to the south and west but it is expected to be one of the oldest on record.

Forecaster Jonathan Powell, of Vantage Weather Services, said: “My goodness haven’t we suffered over the winter, but if people are after sunshine in the next month my advice would be to head for the airport.
“It is going to remain dry at least, but we will all need to remember to pull on an extra layer of clothing before stepping outside.

May could well be our saving grace because at the moment it’s looking a lot better but I am sorry to say after that we are heading down the same route as last year.”Hmmmm......."Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose".Read the full story here.


Easter in Poland 2013.

Friday, March 29, 2013

Video - IMF Proposes $1.40 a Gallon Gas Tax on US Drivers.



IMF Proposes $1.40 a Gallon Gas Tax on US Drivers.(Fox).The national average for a gallon of gasoline is currently at $3.65. On top of that sky-high price, the International Monetary Fund has now proposed that the U.S. should impose a tax of $1.40 per gallon in order to pay for social programs around the world and help the environment.Hmmmm......You think that 'I'm Not A Dictator' could pass this by executive order?

Monday, March 25, 2013

Sequester? What Sequester? Obama 'Admin' Plans to Spend $150 Million for Green Energy Projects (Because It’s Worked So Well Before).


Sequester? What Sequester? Obama 'Admin' Plans to Spend $150 Million for Green Energy Projects (Because It’s Worked So Well Before).(Heritage).
Just what America needs: More taxpayer-funded green energy projects.
The Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Internal Revenue Service released plans to re-allocate more than $150 million in remaining manufacturing tax credits for “green” energy projects originally authorized by the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the stimulus bill), according to Recovery.gov.
Phase II of the Section 48C Advanced Manufacturing Tax Credit seeks to grant the tax credits on a competitive basis to green energy projects that demonstrate “commercial viability, domestic job creation, technological innovation, speed to project completion, and potential for reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions,” the DOE wrote.
The $150 million in funds remaining were left over from “remaining tax credits that were never fully monetized by previous awardees,” the DOE announced.
The agency’s original authorization for the program stood at $2.3 billion, with individual awards available of up to 30 percent of the project cost. According to the White House, 183 manufacturing facilities qualified during the tax credit’s initial authorization.
However, The Heritage Foundation’s Jack Spencer says in demonstrating “commercial viability”—in other words—“by meeting the conditions to receive the credits, the applicants actually demonstrate that they do not need the credits.

Among the initial recipients of the 48C tax credit are companies that have declared bankruptcy, shut down production facilities, or laid off workers:
Tens of millions of dollars in tax credits were also allocated to well-known companies like Dow, Dupont, General Electric, and Siemens for a variety of solar, wind, and other manufacturing facilities. Read the full story here.


Monday, February 18, 2013

Carbon tax hallucinations.


Carbon tax hallucinations.(WUWT).By Paul Driessen.
Average planetary temperatures haven’t budged in 16 years. Hurricanes and strong tornadoes are at or near their lowest ebb in decades. Global sea ice is back to normal, Arctic ice is nearly normal, and the Antarctic icepack continues to grow. The rate of sea level rise remains what it was in 1900.
And yet, President Obama and many politicians, newscasters and alarmist scientists continue to insist that carbon dioxide emissions are changing Earth’s climate, and we need to take immediate action to prevent storms like Hurricane Sandy and avert catastrophes predicted by IPCC computer models and alleged “scientific consensus.” Not surprisingly, polls show public support for controlling CO2 output and taxing hydrocarbon use – to “ensure climate security” and “save vital federal programs” from budgetary axes.
As the liberal lobby Think Progress put it, people “overwhelmingly” prefer a carbon tax on “big polluters” versus cuts in favorite programs “like education, Social Security, Medicare and environmental protection.”
Five-alarm climate claims, skewed polling questions and phony taxes-versus-grandma budget alternatives will almost always ensure support for carbon taxes – especially among Bigger Government and Ban Fossil Fuels constituencies. More rational analysis reveals that dreams of hundred-billion-dollar windfalls from slapping regressive new taxes on job creation and economic growth are nothing more than dangerous tax revenue hallucinations. They would bring intense pain for no climate or economic gain.
Employing Energy Information Administration data, a recent Heritage Foundation study by economists David Kreutzer and Nicolas Loris found that a tax starting at $25-per-ton of CO2 emitted and increasing by 5% per year would cut a family of four’s income by $1,400 annually, raise their utility bills by $500 a year, and increase gasoline fill-ups by up to 50 cents per gallon. That’s $2,000 a year chopped from their budget for food, vacations, home and car payments and repairs, college and retirement savings, dental and medical care, and overall quality of life.
Even “millionaire” families making $200,000 a year would find such a hit painful. While the poorest families might get some offsetting tax relief, most would get nothing – nor would employers.
Carbon taxes would thus increase the likelihood that many breadwinners will end up unemployed, since the tax would raise business energy costs dramatically, force companies to trim hours and/or employees, and result in an aggregate loss of at least 1 million jobs by 2016, Heritage notes. That would bring more home foreclosures, greater stress, reduced nutrition, and more strokes and heart attacks, especially for older workers whose odds of finding new employment are increasingly bleak.

No small businesses or energy-intensive manufacturing companies would get a rebate for their soaring carbon taxes. Nor would any mall, hospital, school, church, synagogue or charity group.
Hydrocarbons provide over 83% of all the energy that powers America. A carbon tax would put a hefty surcharge on everything we make, grow, ship, eat and do. It would put the federal government in control of, not just one-sixth of our economy as under Obamacare, but 100% of our economy and lives. It would make the United States increasingly less productive, less competitive globally, less able to provide opportunities for our children.
But it gets worse, because this tax on America’s energy and productivity is not being promoted in a vacuum. It would be imposed on top of countless other job and economy strangling actions.
President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has already issued 2,071 new rules and dispensed a regulatory burden of over $353 billion per year – equal to all wealth generated annually by Virginia’s private sector. It is now preparing still more rules, the most crushing of which would regulate the same CO2 emissions that some in Congress want to tax, from both moving and stationary sources. Most, if not all of its punitive rules, are based on exaggerated risks, fear mongering, junk science, and illusory health, welfare, “environmental justice” and “sustainability” benefits.
Other agencies are inflicting still more rules, and more crushing paperwork burdens. Obamacare alone will add 127,602,371 more hours per year to the federal paperwork burden for American businesses and families. That’s enough time to carve 1,039 Mount Rushmore monuments, says the Washington Examiner. Even at $25 per hour, that’s $32 billion a year. On top of that, there are the Dodd-Frank financial requirements and myriad other costly, time-consuming, economy-sapping, job-killing rules.
Meanwhile, federal “discretionary” spending skyrocketed another $129 billion annually in just four years under Obama. That’s comparable to what carbon tax snake oil salesmen claim a $25-per-ton tax would raise each year, several years into a steadily escalating tax, using static analyses that ignore all these “concrete lifesaver” effects.

And for what? The Kyoto Protocol is dead. Japan and many other countries are rejecting any new binding emission targets. China, India, other rapidly developing nations, and even Germany and Europe are burning more coal, emitting more carbon dioxide, and sending atmospheric CO2 levels higher.
And yet, average planetary temperatures show no trend up or down, and global hurricane activity stands at a near-record low. There’s no change in big tornadoes, droughts or rains averaged over the USA for the past century. Polar sea ice is down slightly in the Northern Hemisphere, but up in the Southern. And sea levels show no measurable deviation from trends over the last hundred years.
The only thing that will happen if carbon taxes are inflicted on the US economy is that American jobs, economic growth, living standards, health, dreams and lives will be sacrificed for nothing
We need to stop basing laws and policies on hallucinations – and start basing them on reality.Read the full story here.

Related : ShoreBank - Obama - CarbonTrading.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/229805/shady-shorebank-bailout/michelle-malkin

http://knowledgecreatespower.blogspot.com/2010/05/shore-bank-obamas-mother-and-geithners.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/shorebank.php

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...