JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Study shows bad economic times means there are more climate skeptics

I’ve said before that the man-made climate-faith is a luxury of the stupidly wealthy. Only people with time to stress about the carbon footprint of their oranges can wallow in the indulgence of owning the idea that windmills in Alabama could reduce tidal surges in Peru. It follows then that if (or as) the economy falls apart so will the Green religion.

A new research paper backs this up, but possibly shows more about researcher’s confirmation bias than it does about the public. (I suspect the most useful part of this research was that a couple of hundred people got to see a video with Richard Lindzen in.)

That the global-eco-faith needs lots of wealth is a horrible conundrum for the Greens. The best thing they can do to encourage “climate belief” is to get out of the way and let the economy prosper, which of course is the last thing the Greens can do since “Growth” = “Pollution” in the GreenWorldView. So the more the Greens do to slow or wreck the economy, the more skeptical the population will get. It’s a “positive” feedback loop that may protect Western Civilization a little bit. Joy.

Is that motivated recall or motivated analysis?

The researchers report on “motivated recall” but use some pretty “motivated analysis” to misunderstand their data.

“A mediation analysis suggested that the tendency for conservatives to be more skeptical of climate change is consistent with a stronger motivation to justify the economic system.

I’ll translate that for them:

A mediation analysis suggested that the tendency for progressives to be more gullible about climate change is consistent with a stronger motivation to justify their anti-capitalist economic system.

To their credit, the paper does mention something on these lines — the researchers admit that they hadn’t been looking for it, but, golly, their results raise the possibility that the anti-capitalists “may possess an opposing motivation”…. and “nonconsiously exaggerate”. No kidding. The Carbon Wolf will eat the Penguin King, drown whole Cities, and unleash the God of War?

Given the historic rank failure of anti-capitalist economies, it’s only fitting that those who lean toward communism might also lean towards the Doctrine of the evil Carbon Wolf. (That’s the unlikely faith that humans can control the climate despite us making only 4% of a trace gas that is not even the dominant greenhouse gas, and the almost total lack of evidence or predictive association between CO2 and long term climate change.)

To create enviro-panic, suppress econo-panic

Their final conclusion is a typical postmodernist one advising that to “overcome public resistance to pro-environmental policies” the communicator ought to tell people how healthy the economy is at the same time as telling them how bad the environment is:

“…simply providing people with scientific evidence is unlikely to be effective in changing their minds. However, it may be possible to break the psychological link between proenvironmental initiatives and worries about economic risk by linking scientific information to statements about the strength and stability of the economic system. “

How about public officials just tell the public the truth and let them figure out what matters? Radical…

REFERENCE:

Hennes et al (2016) “Motivated Recall in the Service of the Economic System: The Case of Anthropogenic Climate Change,Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, published online April 28, 2016. [PDF freely available].

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.6/10 (48 votes cast)
Study shows bad economic times means there are more climate skeptics, 8.6 out of 10 based on 48 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/zrjepou

89 comments to Study shows bad economic times means there are more climate skeptics

  • #
    pat

    unfortunately most of the costly mistakes only get reported on by local media:

    5 May: HuronDailyTribune: Chris Aldridge: Out-of-control wind turbine ‘shook itself apart’ in Huron County
    Official: ‘Worldwide, this is the first (failure)’ of V82 model
    BAD AXE — What’s it take to topple a 400-foot, 485,000-pound wind turbine?
    Mechanical failures, an imbalance and the ensuing “violent act.”
    Essentially, self-destruction.
    And a dose of irony.
    Or as officials call it, an “overspeed event.”
    That’s the determination wind energy developer Exelon Wind Generation, turbine manufacturer Vestas and a third party have made after a months-long investigation into the root cause of a turbine’s collapse onto an Oliver Township farm field at the site of the state’s first utility-scale wind energy project. It happened on Feb. 25.
    The turbines in Harvest 1 Wind Farm are eight years old. On the turbine that fell, near Berne and Gagetown roads, seals failed on all three cylinders in its pitch system, which controls how the turbine’s blades move back and forth, officials said…
    It happened during an eight-hour period, according to Exelon.
    “It was there, we just didn’t see it,” Higgins said. “We weren’t monitoring it at the time.”…
    Adding to the irony, officials say a contributing factor to the collapse was wind speeds near 45 mph.
    “Any lower than that, the winds wouldn’t have had enough force to push the blades into that position which created an overspeed,” Van Diepenbeek said.
    However, the explanation left county planners with some uncertainty…ETC
    http://www.michigansthumb.com/news/article_971c2e94-12e9-11e6-9697-3b5428a401e1.html

    6 May: Buffalo News: Pamela Atwater: Another Voice: Navy, Air Force share concerns about wind turbines
    The Naval Air Station at Corpus Christi, Texas, is faced with the same dilemma that the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station (NFARS) confronts: What impact will at least 70 proposed 620-foot-high industrial wind turbines have on military flight operations?
    “I do feel like one day we’re going to wake up surrounded by wind farms in South Texas significantly impacting the mission [of the Naval Air Station] in a negative way,” Capt. Christopher Misner, commanding officer of Naval Air Station Kingsville, said during a Texas Senate Committee on Veteran Affairs and Military Installations hearing in April.
    Rear Admiral Dell D. Bull, chief of naval air training, is quoted as saying he’s unsure if naval air operations can safely coexist with industrial wind turbines, “and I don’t know how anyone can say otherwise.”
    Similar concerns have been raised about plans by Apex Clean Energy to construct massive industrial wind turbines in the Town of Somerset in Niagara County and the Town of Yates in Orleans County.
    Three former high-ranking Air Force officers who served at NFARS recently wrote to Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and other state officials. They said that the presence of the massive structures “will inject a major encroachment into the military operating area around the air base, resulting in a major threat to NFARS when the next Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) recommendations are made, possibly as soon as 2017.”…
    Sen. Donna Campbell, a Texas state senator and the committee’s chairwoman, said she won’t hesitate to take action if military flight training is jeopardized by the wind turbines.
    We certainly don’t want that in Somerset and Yates, either…
    http://www.buffalonews.com/opinion/another-voice/another-voice-navy-air-force-share-concerns-about-wind-turbines-20160506

    123

  • #
    pat

    very lengthy, can’t copy…worth reading all:

    5 May: EconomicTimesIndia: Arjit Barman: SunEdison Bankruptcy: Is India’s Sunrise sector staring at another Enron
    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/energy/power/sunedison-bankruptcy-is-indias-sunrise-sector-staring-at-another-enron/articleshow/52115248.cms

    112

  • #
    AndyG55

    UAH now out for April

    Australia this century….. trend is -.0035°C/year

    (my image host seems to be down, I’ll post the graph when I can)

    164

    • #
      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        The lines in the graph jump 1.0C from year to year, with some years up to 2.5C.

        Averaging a trend line over a graph like this is purely an academic exercise. It shows the temperature is stable over a period of time, nothing more. The trend is too flat to say much more about it (it is as they say, indistinguishable from zero).

        70

        • #
          Ted O'Brien

          We know that. But observations tell us that many people in high places do not..

          10

      • #
        Glen Michel

        Flat as a witches tit for all intents and purposes.I will send it on to Matthew England- the dude who reckons that the climate is on STEROIDS!!

        00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Andy, you know what this means …?

      It means that the temperature for Australia is going to drop by one third of one whole degree celsius, over the next century. Your great great grandchildren will be doomed!

      Everybody panic!

      70

      • #
        AndyG55

        Where’s all that warming we were promised :-(

        Even 0.005C by 2050 would be pounced upon by the climate bletheren.

        62

      • #
        Yonniestone

        In the context of divide and conquer we are all connected by only .0035° of separation. :)

        20

  • #
    Dave

    Agree with this totally

    “How about public officials just tell the public the truth and let them figure out what matters?”

    But majority of people have bought the [snip] nonsense:

    “You can’t keep on burning fossil fuels”
    “Carbon Dioxide is Pollution”

    What has to happen is questions:
    Why is CO2 bad?
    What is the human contribution to CO2 Globally?
    Is Australia that big a polluter per square kilometer?

    Keep up the attack with questions, which they have NO answer to!
    It’s all about the media

    But Social media is also making huge inroads by asking questions?

    But when it hits their HIP POCKETS – people will become more cynical of this [snip] nonsense!

    [Editorial discretion applied.] AZ

    62

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      The environmentalists; which as a breed seem to be terminally innumerate; use very odd measurements with the express intention of making the potential effects appear more emotive than they should be. It is all mind games.

      Stating temperature change in terms of one hundredths of a degree per decade (which is the metric of some of the official figures that I have seen) is totally bizarre. It is like measuring the speed of a snail in terms of furlongs per fortnight.

      101

  • #
    el gordo

    ‘…the strength and stability of the economic system. “

    At the moment interest rates around the world are at rock bottom and we are locked into a deflationary spiral. Do not be afraid, the ‘third way’ beckons.

    “…simply providing people with scientific evidence is unlikely to be effective in changing their minds.”

    That’s true to a point, but if its presented simply so that busy people can understand, then it might get traction. The Klimatariat’s models continue to fail and their hypothesis is unverifiable on so many levels, so its up to us to discover how the system works.

    53

  • #
    diogenese2

    Jo – link doesn’t work

    http://psycnet.apa.org/psycarticles/2016-20779-001

    may take you to the abstract

    30

    • #
      el gordo

      The authors seem unaware that most skeptics first and foremost think the AGW science is wrong and then join in the battle against ignorance.

      Left wing green blob activists may one day admit that they exaggerated the power of CO2 to destroy the planet.

      92

    • #

      I just love the “misremembered the evidence to be less serious”!!!
      Is that TANGIBLE? I like also a fresh garden salid, with tangables.

      40

    • #
      • #
        el gordo

        Thinking of all the people I know who have been brainwashed into believing CO2 is harmful, if only they understood the science.

        From that link:

        ‘Suffice it to say that neither politicians nor the voters who back them appreciate the suggestion that the opinions they hold are motivated, even in part, by social and psychological factors that are probably outside of their awareness. American society and many others have yet to find a way of allowing the facts — scientific and otherwise — to trump special interests, political posturing, and motivated reasoning when it comes to the development of public policy. But that doesn’t mean we should stop trying.’

        40

      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        While that little story was 2013, it shows how the liberals seem to confuse themselves with motivated justification,(i.e. they confuse themselves with nonsense, and never ask the pertinent questions of the sceptics directly, they study at a distance).

        An example of this is their own study, thus: which measures responses to statements such as “Most policies serve the greater good,”

        Can you measure responses to such a question?
        Who knows what “most policies” are?
        And what is “the greater good”? is that human good, government good, society good, peace of mind good, environment good?

        That statement is a statement of wishful thinking. A poor question of a poorly identified subject. And a question of “most” is generally accepted as being greater than 50%. So we hope that more than 50% of the policies are for a “greater good” whatever that is.

        So much more wrong with that little doco (like using Obama as a reference), but I’ll leave it off there.

        30

      • #
        Sinoman

        I conducted an extensive study of fellow students, just prior to completing my Psych. degree and found that all bar one were undertaking the course to ascertain why they, themselves, were so screwed up.
        I walked away from the University, satisfied that I now knew all there was to psychology and psychologists.
        It is really quite simple.
        All psychologists are nuts.

        10

  • #

    At the end of the day, all that matters is number one. We’ll see which dog eats which dog.

    52

  • #

    Thanks to the current warm water to the North, “global warming” rains are pouring across the continent, delivering billions of dollars of good economic times to farmers and pastoralists. From the South West, early season cold fronts have been marching across the wheat-belts adding more billions of dollars. More on the way.
    So global warming is the number 1 threat to the world’s economies? Pull the other leg Barack Obama, it’s got bells on.
    Sorry team, but that’s my “motivated analysis”!

    233

    • #

      The red thumb guy is back, what kind of economic cr*ck is this guy smoking. Oh, the same as the rest causing ‘enviro-panic’.

      131

      • #
        AndyG55

        Tom.. Just add the thumbs together. :-)

        The green ones are positives, but the red ones are also positives because you have annoyed some child-mind that doesn’t have the intelligence to actually say anything. :-)

        141

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          We could ask Jo to modify the thumbs-thingy so that each press of a red thumb just adds one more green one. It will drive the hand-flutterers berserk.

          Just a thought, on a slow Saturday (where I am).

          70

    • #
      • #
        Lawrie

        Howard had the states introduce carbon sequestration by stopping land clearing by farmers. In this way he met Kyoto targets and managed to do it at no cost since states do not have to pay compensation for property acquisition whereas the Commonwealth does. Labor, in trying to prevent the loosening of native vegetation laws which are very restrictive, wants to over-rule the states in cases it believes is counter to it’s belief in the great carbon fraud. In doing so it may open itself to paying compensation under the terms of the constitution.

        See what happens when you start fiddling with property rights and pretend you can control the climate; mayhem and madness.

        10

  • #
    diogenese2

    From the abstract the study looks highly contrived and the results of very marginal significance. Worth $11.95? I can get a bottle of Banrock Station in Tesco for that.

    “Unlike many other issues, however, much of the disagreement about climate change centers (US spelling) not on how best to take action to address the problem, but on whether the problem exists at all.”

    Is it indeed? – did this apply to the selection of participants and how do you “experimentally induce (participants) to justify the economic system”? I hope the electricity used in that process was from renewable sources.

    41

  • #
    Turtle of WA

    I’ve said before that the man-made climate-faith is a luxury of the stupidly wealthy. Only people with time to stress about the carbon footprint of their oranges can wallow in the indulgence of owning the idea that windmills in Alabama could reduce tidal surges in Peru.

    Elizabeth Farrelly, via Tim Blair:

    In all, nine hectares of tree canopy will go; half the size of Hyde Park. We’re in a massive, global year-long heatwave. The planet is sweltering. Trees cool the earth, sequester carbon, build soil. And we chop nine hectares?

    The workers (who Marxists like Farrelly are supposed to champion), are referred to as ‘fluoro monkeys’. That’s the basic level of economic understanding of the warmists.

    91

  • #
    Alexander

    To create enviro-panic, suppress econo-panic

    More cultural and social engineering. That this is so explicit really tells us what is happening, that this is a political conversation and not a science one. The mastery of skillful means is concentrated in the politics, and the science part is just a token authority-crutch for the politics.

    For another example, see: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/05/new-study-outlines-how-to-talk-about-climate-change-to-increase-donations/

    How to talk about climate change so people will act

    What can you do about climate change? The better question might be: What can we? University of California San Diego researchers show in a new study that framing the issue collectively is significantly more effective than emphasis on personal responsibility.

    Published in the journal Climatic Change, the study finds that people are willing to donate up to 50 percent more cash to the cause when thinking about the problem in collective terms.

    Thinking about climate change from a personal perspective produced little to no change in behavior.

    The study’s findings run contrary to popular wisdom. Pick up a leaflet on global warming or Google around, and chances are you’ll find a “you” message urging action on the environment. Personal appeals are everywhere. Advocacy groups use them, as do the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the United Nations. A marketing campaign run by the European Union, for example, was explicitly focused on reminding people of their personal responsibility. “You Control Climate Change,” it declared. But is that the best way to go?

    “Climate change is arguably the largest collective-action problem the world has ever faced,” said lead author Nick Obradovich, a doctoral candidate in the Department of Political Science in UC San Diego’s Division of Social Sciences. “Yet we’re operating on a lot of baked-in assumptions on how to motivate people.”

    60

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      This debate comes around periodically – it is a fashion thing.

      Version 1: “Take personal responsibility – YOU can make a difference”.

      Version 2: “We need to take collective responsibility – WE can make a difference”.

      Version 3: “Our politicians need to do more – lobby YOUR representative today”

      Right now, we appear to be moving between versions 1 and 2. But it matters not. None of the options are effective, in the longer term. Marching with banners does not change the weather.

      50

  • #
    pat

    6 May: CBS: Jonathan Berr: At Tesla, Elon Musk may be aiming too high
    As if that weren’t enough, Musk also announced plans to increase the company’s production rate to 500,000 vehicles in 2018, two years earlier than expected, and raising it to 1 million by 2020. UBS analyst Colin Langan estimates that Palo Alto, California-based Tesla will need about $2 billion to ramp-up production.
    “Ultimately, we see the new volume targets as too aggressive, setting up investors for disappointment,” wrote Langan, who rates the company’s shares as a “sell,” in a note distributed to clients…
    Many experts say Musk’s production goal is unrealistic…
    Langan: “Customers may be underestimating the price with desired options and overestimating the EV (electric vehicle) tax credit.”…
    Another company associated with Musk, Solar City (SCTY), has plunged nearly 60 percent in the wake of disappointing earnings. The largest installer of solar equipment, whose board he chairs, is due to report earnings on April 9. Neither Tesla nor Solar City is profitable (Space X, the Musk company that’s pioneering the use of reusable rockets, isn’t publicly traded). Solar City is also a favorite of short sellers, who control about 40 percent of the stock’s float…
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/at-tesla-elon-musk-may-be-aiming-too-high/

    5 May: ZeroHedge: Tyler Durden: With Jim Chanos Short, Is SolarCity The Next SunEdison? The Full Bear Case
    One year ago, SunEdison was the darling of the hedge fund world. It is now bankrupt. Moments ago, Jim Chanos revealed that (in addition to Tesla) he is also short Elon Musk’s SolarCity, sending the stock sliding.
    But what is the bear case?
    Well, courtesy of Axiom’s Gordon Johnson, here are some very specific reasons why Chanos may once again have a home run on his “short” hands. Below is his “big picture” summary:…READ ON
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-04/jim-chanos-short-solarcity-next-sunedison-full-bear-case

    5 May: InvestorPlace: James Brumley: SolarCity Corp (SCTY) Could Be Solar’s Next Fatality
    Chanos is probably right: SCTY stock is a zombie, and many investors don’t even know it yet
    Kynikos Associates LP’s famous (maybe infamous) founder and manager Jim Chanos may be an annoyingly outspoken, self-serving pessimist, but he’s right about one thing: Solar panel installer and financier SolarCity Corp (SCTY) is in trouble, and it could finally crumble beyond repair in 2016 barring some dramatic changes in its current fiscal trajectory…
    In light of the fact that no solar power business model has proven truly viable yet, though — and this goes beyond the implosion of SunEdison Inc (SUNEQ) — those SolarCity fans and shareholders may be holding on to nothing more than a dream.
    Chanos didn’t pull any punches when he spoke with CNBC on Monday. He plainly said, “The problem with SolarCity is they’re losing money on every installation and making it up on volume,” predicting financial trouble would become debilitating for the company this year…
    http://investorplace.com/2016/05/solarcity-corp-scty-stock-chanos-fatality/#.VyyMepJJk_4

    30

  • #
    pat

    6 May: Bloomberg: Brian Eckhouse: SunEdison Bankruptcy Threatens Dividends at TerraForm Units
    As many as 15 TerraForm power plants may be facing default
    There may be `a stoppage of distribution from these projects’
    While the yieldcos haven’t been dragged into SunEdison’s bankruptcy proceedings, as many as 10 of TerraForm Power Inc.’s wind and solar farms and five of TerraForm Global Inc.’s face defaults because they have project-level debt with clauses linked to the health of the parent company, according to a report by Moody’s analyst Swami Venkataraman…
    These cross-default clauses reveal the complicated and interrelated structure of SunEdison, the world’s biggest clean-energy developer, and the two TerraForm companies it formed to buy power plants, along with the many wind and solar farms that typically are structured as their own corporate entities.
    “There might be a price to pay, and possibly a stoppage of distribution from these projects to the yieldcos,” Venkataraman said in an interview. “They will need some sort of settlement.”…
    The companies fund their dividends with revenue from selling power, usually to utilities. A spokesman for both TerraForm Power and TerraForm Global declined to comment…
    While SunEdison doesn’t own these power plants, it developed many of the yieldcos’ assets, and in some cases remains their operator…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-05/sunedison-s-bankruptcy-threatens-dividends-at-terraform-units

    30

  • #
    Analitik

    Only the affluent can continue afford to indulge in fantasies like CAGW, carbon abatement and mass renewable energy generation. Those who struggle financially are faced with dealing with realities.

    180

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      You said exactly what I was going to say. And I probably would have been more verbose so you did everyone a favor.

      100

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Same here Roy :)

        When economies are depressed the real signs I see are businesses closed, houses run down, crime increase, unregistered uninsured vehicles on the road, more rubbish dumped anywhere, people more aggressive etc…..
        Not homeless people organizing mass protests for their concern over an oil pipeline that may as well be on another planet when you are looking for your next meal and some fresh cardboard to keep you dry.

        40

        • #
          bobl

          I always make the same point about illegal “recreational” drugs. It is predominately a first world problem because people who burn dung to cook their food are too busy surviving to bother with drugs (or oil pipelines).

          20

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            State sponsored lotteries are the same thing as drugs, Bob. The people who buy the tickets are the least able to afford to spend waste the money. The rest of us can judge the odds and say no.

            The come-on is always, you can’t win if you don’t buy or, someone will win, why not you? Both are true statements but the odds are abysmal.

            10

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Yoni,

          I notice some of the same things. Already six to eight years ago all the best restaurants in town, landmark eating places that were around for a long time, went dark. Admittedly they were expensive places to eat but this is a fairly affluent town so I wouldn’t have expected them to fold so easily. And certainly not all in the short length of time that it happened. There have been business closures and business properties staying empty generally too.

          Economically we’re hurting more than the great Obama wants to let on. But we’re not so bad off around here that climate change has been dropped in favor of survival just yet. And I say, “Thankfully,” to that. I wouldn’t miss climate change of course. But I would hate to see a once good place to live going down the drain as you’ve described it. But everywhere it’s now a struggle.

          And remember, this is California, the once Golden State. So I think climate change will be the watch word until the last shovel full of dirt is thrown on top of our coffin. Remember the movie, Die Hard? That’s the left coast of America. Only it’s all the wrong things that die hard.

          10

  • #
    Richard Barnett

    Jo,

    I really like your clever statement,

    “So the more the Greens do to slow or wreck the economy, the more skeptical the population will get. It’s a “positive” feedback loop that may protect Western Civilization a little bit. Joy.

    Very much on target!

    110

    • #
      diogenese2

      Actually it is a “negative” feedback in that the action provokes a resistance which limits the outcome.

      60

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Negative in the way it acts, to produce a nett positive outcome.

        40

      • #
        el gordo

        From a purely scientific perspective the overwhelming evidence of ‘negative feedback’ should destroy the warmist argument that a little bit of extra CO2 is harmful to the planet, but they are not listening (having already made up their minds) so convincing them that the intensification of the Subtropical Ridge is natural … won’t be easy.

        10

  • #
    Phil R

    Being an un-philosopher and -intellectual, I looked up “postmodernist” to get a definition. While following a few links, I came across this quote from a philospher named Daniel Bennett:

    Postmodernism, the school of ‘thought’ that proclaimed ‘There are no truths, only interpretations’ has largely played itself out in absurdity, but it has left behind a generation of academics in the humanities disabled by their distrust of the very idea of truth and their disrespect for evidence, settling for ‘conversations’ in which nobody is wrong and nothing can be confirmed, only asserted with whatever style you can muster.

    I sure hope he is right that it has largely played itself out, but seems to be alive and well in “climate science.”

    140

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I suffered this at university.

      “There is no truth, there is no reality, there is only opinion and perception”. That philosophy underpins all political systems, and will not therefore “play itself out”, any time soon.

      Sorry.

      40

      • #
        Another Ian

        RW

        So does that mean that Australia has just invested in post modern submarines?

        30

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Well I hope not. I am told that the submarine business is going under …

          20

          • #
            Yonniestone

            It’s aboat time, this industry has had many confused over the term Receivership……

            10

      • #
        Phil R

        One can always be optimistic, but thanks for confirming that Climate science is all politics and not science.

        00

  • #
    TdeF

    What I find odd in the ‘anti capitalists’ is that they are greedy, envious people who have no idea what capitalism is. One definition of a capitalist is “a person who uses their wealth to invest in trade and industry for profit”. This is so 19th century, the time of Karl Marx of mass exploitation of the destitute workers in factories.

    Australia does not even have such factories. If anything, the greatest capitalists are the Chinese communists. What Karl Marx did not predict was the 20th century phenomenon of consumerism which meant a car in every household, human rights, workers salaries, the 8 hour day, weeks, even months of holidays a year and so many things, like maternal mortality dropping from 30% and the supporting mother’s pension which meant the end of orphanages and universal suffrage in democratic countries etc. etc. Quality of life for everyone. Now capitalists are simply people with more stuff who do not live on public service salaries.

    These new Green anti capitalists holiday around the world, live in 21st century luxury and rail against capitalists. Greens leader Bob Brown on his retirement with his luxurious indexed Government pension was annoyed that some business leaders did better finanically than he did in parliament, where retirement salaries outstrip ordinary workers retirement incomes by many factors. You would need to have earned and saved many millions to match the retirement incomes of our politicians. Greed is the new Green.

    The reason for the collapse of the warm sharing communists of the Soviet union was that ordinary workers were denied the benefits of consumerism and wanted what they saw on television in Australia TV soaps, like flush toilets, blue jeans, travel and an easy lifestyle going to the beach every day. They did not see capitalism and sweat shops and rich industrialists. They saw ordinary Australians living ordinary lives, lives which were much better than in the communist utopia.

    Greens are a self indulgent middle class who represent no one else and care only about themselves and their environment. They build windmills far from where they live and spoil someone else’s environment.
    Green politicians themselves seem old style communists who use any argument at all to create resentments and promote themselves. Elron Hubbard was also a communist until he founded his own religion. So was the evil Rev Jim Jones, before he founded his religion and took everyone on a one way trip to green Guyana.

    No the leaders of the anti capitalist Green Global Warming Armageddon cult are worried that people are starting to question that the world is warming, that CO2 causes bushfires and hurricanes or that the seas are really rising much. The ABC’s Robyn Williams prediction of seas 100 metres over Sydney by 2100 is starting to look very silly. This is going to hurt their incomes, especially Tim Flannery’s. A holiday home at the mouth of the Hawkesbury is not cheap. It is amazing how many Green leaders do very well out of their anti capitalism, especially billionaire Nobel Peace prize winner Al Gore but also our former Climate Commissioners, not one of whom was a meteorologist. Like Green politicians, their idea of Green has numbers on it.

    140

    • #
      • #
        TdeF

        Thanks Ross. Malcolm is so obviously preparing for an extreme Green government. He is not a shadow of a Liberal, but he was too rich and was snubbed by Labor. So Malcolm will teach them all a lawyer’s lesson in power.
        Like his coup against Tony, Malcolm will use his position to partner the Greens in the Senate. Game over. A spill will not work. Too late the Liberals and Nationals and even Labor will turn to Tony Abbott, but then it will not help. President Malcolm and Lucy are counting the weeks to absolute power. Too bad no one else can see it. Like the coup, there is no law against what he is about to do. It is just unthinkable but Gillard did it, so why not Turnbull? Also, say goodbye to your super, Keating’s great Labor idea, now just another bank account for retrospective laws from Malcolm. Malcolm has his in the Caribbean.

        30

        • #
          TdeF

          Not only did Turnbull get rid of Abbot’s Joe Hockey, he had a double win when he put the openly gay Trent Zimmerman, head of the NSW Liberals in Hockey’s safe seat. This is part of the plan to stack parliament with Turnbull’s Green men, if push comes to shove with Tony Abbott before the election when the preferences are printed. A merchant banker windmill on every corner.

          20

    • #
      TdeF

      I was just musing that Greens use computers made by billionaire capitalists like Steve Jobs or Windows from Bill Gates, fly Virgin by Richard Branson or drive electric cars by Elon Musk and search for information on Google by Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Perhaps they drive Toyotas by Mr Toyoda or even one of Henry Ford’s capitalist mass produced machines? Raging against the exploiters of workers as capitalists is just crazy.

      Many of the 19th century social revolutions to eliminate the workhouses were created by the Chocolate and Soap industrialists and changed society for the better, with cities built by inspired and philanthropic often very religious benefactors and these in turn used as models by all governments, integrated modern cities like Bourneville by the Cadbury family and Port Sunlight by Lord Lever.

      No the Greens are ignorant of history and science and are the PAE, the People Against Everything. Name something and they are against it. They are all for changing the system when power has never been cleaner or cheaper or more plentiful, as with most consumer things like basic food. However they are angry when they are among the most privileged people on the planet and even within their own rich Western democratic societies, often Rebels without a cause.

      Sadly, whatever the question, the science ignorant Greens claim science will have the answers. Perhaps that might be true if society stopped spending trillions on windmills and solar panels for the rich, primitive solutions with no storage when the same money could be spent on fusion, Thorium or storage systems which work. All the wealth in the longest peace time in human history is just being wasted on Green ignorance.

      20

  • #
  • #
    ScotsmaninUtah

    New platform for Libertarians – RT America

    O/T
    With Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton seemingly locked in a battle to be the most hated presidential candidates in history and yet are allowed to dominate the American stage in the elections I am pleased to see that in future there will be a platform for Libertarians who are often excluded from qualifying as a prospective Presedential candidate due to the restrictive 2 party ballot-access rules.

    30

  • #
    handjive

    The Age of Cheap Oil and Natural Gas Is Just Beginning

    Fracking and horizontal drilling have sent supplies through the roof and prices through the floor, and things are likely to stay that way

    http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-age-of-cheap-oil-and-natural-gas-is-just-beginning/

    50

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘If as a producer you’re really squeezed by your overproduction and your credit lines and your overflowing storage, you’ll have to settle for less. And you will. Which is going to put downward pressure on oil prices for a while to come. Inventories are more than full all over the world. With oil that was largely purchased, somewhat ironically, because prices were perceived as being low.’

      Zero Hedge

      10

  • #
    Neville

    This article by Bjorn Lomborg is one of his best. It also contains many links to further our understanding about some of the benefits of the world’s slight warming since the end of the LIA.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/05/no-one-ever-says-it-but-in-many-ways-global-warming-will-be-a-go/

    20

  • #
    PeterS

    Yes as the world’s economies continue their decline more and more people are being turned off the so called climate change nonsense but the opposite is happening in the political sphere. The politicians have the opposite view because they are hungry for more tax not less to try and pay for their exploding debts so they will introduce whatever scheme they can get away with to make us and business pay more tax in the guise to save the world. Makes me wonder who is the stupid ones – the politicians or the voters who put them there in the first place. Both I suppose. Oh well enjoy the ride while we can. When it’s all said and done it’s not the climate change nonsense that will destroy the world, it will be the ever increasing national debts of the Western economies that will lead to some super-GFC and drop us right into some NWO to take over our lives who will probably couldn’t care less about climate change anyway. Oh the irony of it all!

    10

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      At least in England and Australia, whoever we vote for they quickly morph into a Holier than Though environmentalist. America however, has a lot of explaining to do.

      With a two party dominant system, voting for a minor party is simply voting for a major party through preferences. So what do you do?

      It’s obvious to everybody except the socialists, that a declining economy causes people to prioritize what’s important to them. The environment, other countries, the possibility of a global warming catastrophe, are all not as important as paying your mortgage and feeding the family.

      Somewhere along the lines politicians have forgotten that Tax takes money out of the economy.

      20

      • #
        mike restin

        No Greg.
        Politicians already believe taxes, unemployment payments and welfare all add to the economy.
        It’s how they’re programmed.

        10

  • #
    pat

    6 May: AFR: Ben Potter: Vic solar homes could be paid for ‘environmental and social’ benefits
    About 180,000 solar household¢s in Victoria could be paid an extra tariff for environmental and social benefits of solar power under a draft report from the state’s Essential Services Commission welcomed by renewable energy advocates.
    Solar households and small-scale wind turbine generators would also be paid a “critical peak” tariff of about six times the current flat 5.2¢ a kilowatt hour tariff for solar power sold to the grid during heatwaves that occur about 10 times a year…
    Commissioner Ron Ben-David said the environmental tariff was only illustrative and the government might place a different value on the avoided CO2 emissions. For example, if the government valued avoided emissions at $100 a tonne, total revenue could be nearly $400.
    The recognition of environmental benefits is a first for the renewable energy sector…
    About 100,000 Victorian solar homes still enjoy the original 66¢ KWhr feed-in-tariff, which lasts until 2024 for homes if the same system is kept.
    Another 80,000 enjoy a 25¢ tariff until the end of the year, while 100,000 are already on a flat 5.2¢ tariff. These households will go onto new rates next year.
    http://www.afr.com/business/energy/vic-solar-homes-could-be-paid-for-environmental-and-social-benefits-20160506-gooa75

    6 May: WesternDailyPress: Tristan Cork: American firm SunEdison is bankrupt – leaving Britain’s most controversial solar farm in Wiltshire
    PHOTO CAPTION: The residents protesting against the solar farm
    The giant American corporation that built the West’s most controversial solar farm has gone bankrupt – sparking fears residents living in the village will be left tens of thousands of pounds out of pocket…
    The firm promised villagers almost £40,000 in ‘community benefit funds’, but nothing has yet been paid…
    But with SunEdison now bankrupt, a question mark hangs over who will end up owning and running the solar farm, and whether anyone will want to take on running a solar farm which could end up having to be dismantled.
    Parish councillors in Broughton Gifford said they had ‘a lot of issues’ regarding the installation of panels and the way the solar farm was run…
    http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/American-firm-built-Britain-s-controversial-solar/story-29238351-detail/story.html

    10

  • #
    MudCrab

    Why is this remotely surprising?

    Being Green has always been a wealthy thing. When you are wealthy and happy with everything your family needs then that cute furry animal is an endangered species and the place it lives old growth forest filled with significant and valuable trees.

    If you are starving then that cute animal is dinner for your entire family and those trees make great firewood to cook the beast on.

    Tribal hunter/gatherers are not one with nature out of choice, they are doing it because starving to death isn’t something they want to do over the weekend.

    90

    • #
      Lawrie

      Most astute.

      20

    • #
      bobl

      Yes,
      I remember bringing an Indonesian person to do a visit to Port Headland. As is pretty normal for the North West the road was lined with roadkill, kangaroos predominately. The Indonesian coming from a society where perhaps one family member in 10 has a job (and that person funds the whole extended family) commented that in Indonesia, if you were lucky enough to run over an animal, it would be straight into the boot to feed the family for a week.

      10

  • #
    Lawrie

    The global financial crisis was largely responsible for the disaster that was Copenhagen but unfortunately the powers that be did not learn the lesson. The current downturn in world economic activity is stifling the green dream and yet our leaders have been very slow to realise, if they have at all, that expensive power is killing our economy and that their beliefs are ridiculously wrong.

    [SNIP. Lawrie, your comment is OK, but I can't moderate that discussion.18C. Sorry. - J]

    10

  • #
    J.H.

    Well my electricity bill was over $500.00 for the quarter…. a few years back it was about half that. Now that’s a friggin’ hockey stick.

    30

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      My Telstra bill used to be $18 per quarter, now it’s $180 per quarter. All of it is line rental. Now that’s a hockey stick.

      As far as I can tell, my electricity costs have about doubled. But a lot of other things have doubled as well. Possibly due to electricity, I don’t know.

      20

      • #
        Ross

        You guys are lucky. I’m in NZ –my connection charge is going up to $2.39 /day ( incl GST) very soon( they will give me 10% discount if I pay promptly). So even if I’m away on holiday for a quarter I’m still paying more than Greg.

        10

  • #
    pat

    6 May: CarbonPulse: Stian Reklev: Analysts say Australia can meet CO2 targets with current policies, but market needed
    A government-commissioned report on Friday said Australia could meet its 2030 GHG emission targets without putting in place new policies, although the analysis relied on the ERF and Safeguard Mechanism creating a traded market with prices up to A$80 ($58.91) per tonne of CO2e…
    “Energetics believes that there will be a significant intersection between the role of the ERF and the Safeguard Mechanism between 2021 and 2030,” it said, adding that the latter would spark a prominent secondary market in Australian Carbon Credit Unit (ACCU) trading…
    The report’s annex showed the analysts expected the ERF to get access to a large amount of emission cuts in the land sector at around A$20-25 per tonne, but that cuts in other sectors amounting to around 10 million tonnes for the year 2030 alone would cost over A$80 per tonne…
    Tristan Edis of consultancy Green Energy Markets said on Twitter that the study assumed such a transformation of the current regime that it amounted to a new set of policies.
    “This report commissioned by the government highlights the need for much tighter regulation through measures such as the government’s ‘Safeguard Mechanism’, significantly more funding for the Emissions Reduction Fund and/or direct or indirect carbon pricing of around $70 tonne for certain activities. None of these policies or funding is yet on offer but we look forward to further details in the near future,” said John Connor, CEO of think-tank the Climate Institute…
    http://carbon-pulse.com/19439/

    when the Govt commissions a report from this lot, it’s no surprise to see $80 per tonne being mentioned, etc:

    2006: Energetics: Energetics Announces $10 Million Management Buy-out
    Energetics Pty Ltd, Australia’s leading energy, greenhouse and sustainability consulting firm, announces the completion of a management buy-out…
    The transaction closely follows Energetics’ sale of its US software distribution subsidiary, EnVINTA Corp, to Tersus Energy Plc, a clean energy company listed on the London AIM…
    Tony Cooper said: “This transaction marks the beginning of a new era for Energetics. With a renewed focus on the Australian market and demonstrated commitment of senior management, we look forward to continuing to provide our clients with leading-edge energy, greenhouse and sustainability solutions…
    Peter Chapman, Chief Executive of Accretion, said: “We were initially attracted to Energetics because of the high growth prospects of the energy, greenhouse and sustainability services sector. Having observed the performance of the business over the past 18 months, we are very confident of the ability of Tony Cooper and his team to take advantage of the opportunities in this marketplace. We look forward to supporting them in those endeavours.”…
    Accretion Investment Management is a manager of private equity portfolios for institutional investors…
    http://www.energetics.com.au/insights/latest-news/energetics-in-the-news/energetics-announces-$10-million-management-buy-ou?feed=news

    00

  • #
    pat

    sounds threatening, Standard & Poors!
    ***who will do your CONSIDERING?

    6 May: ClimateChangeNews: Megan Darby: S&P: Banks that ignore climate risk face credit downgrade
    Investments in sectors like agriculture and insurance are vulnerable to weather extremes in a warming world…
    (from research note linked below): “If a bank’s business activities are concentrated in an area or sector ***WE CONSIDER*** could be marred by climate change, this could weaken its business position and put its rating under pressure.”
    The research note follows S&P stripping ExxonMobil of the triple-A credit rating (LINK) it had enjoyed since the 1930s…
    There is a growing awareness coal, oil and gas assets could be “stranded” as carbon-cutting rules and clean technology curb demand…
    In a bid to bolster its green credentials on Thursday, Exxon announced backing for fuel cell technology that could capture carbon emissions from power plants…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/06/sp-banks-that-ignore-climate-risk-face-credit-downgrade/

    the extraordinary Standard & Poors document. their idea of data is strictly financial, of course.

    4 May: S&P Global: Climate Change-Related Legal And Regulatory Threats Should Spur Financial Service Providers To Action
    Quantifying The Effect Of Climate Change Starts With Good-Quality Data…
    Given the financial sector’s role as a key provider of funding to the public and private sector, societies and politicians may increasingly consider that the sector has a duty to help economies deal with or prevent some of the consequences of climate change. For example, financial services companies may be expected to provide the financing required for shifting to a low-carbon economy and building a society that is more resilient to the consequences of global warming. The financial sector also represents the biggest investors.
    Choose to act, or face regulatory pressure
    If companies do not choose to fulfil this role, the authorities could come under significant pressure to apply regulatory and fiscal measures to compel them to act…
    https://www.scribd.com/doc/311698033/Climate-Change-Related-Legal-and-Regulatory-Threats-Should-Spur-Financial-Service-Providers-to-Action-04-05-2016#fullscreen

    00

  • #
    John Robertson

    Once you are facing death due to gangrene ,amputation becomes a reasonable solution.
    The Green Gang ™ have spread like a contagious disease through what was a healthy and wealthy economy.
    The spread of this mass hysteria has been in lock step with the conversion of functional democracy over to Kleptocracy.

    As a government of thieves must lie or die,hence their love for this big ,save the planet” scheme.
    The success of so many dishonest and parasitic people has now nearly collapsed international trading, threatening economies world wide.

    Those of us who produce recognize we are regarded as meal tickets by far too many, property is now an abstraction.
    The taxpaying citizen has no property rights,no protection from legislated theft and no recourse in the Just Us system run by our kleptocrats.

    The fall of Gang Green will be a staged event as the bandits throw the fools to the unsatible mob.
    The enviro-nasties will be just the first of many, scapegoated to divert us cranky impoverished supporters of the state thieves.
    Buy popcorn,stockpile selected metals and enjoy.

    Oh yeah, learn to brew your own beer as we all will soon be like Venezuela too Fed up to allow the breweries to function.

    20

  • #
    pat

    expand the comments & read all. i came across this while searching for recent grants from ***The Macarthur Foundation, see upcoming comment on Yale survey:

    7 May: The Conversation: Sea-level rise has claimed five whole islands in the Pacific: first scientific evidence
    Authors:
    Simon Albert, Senior Research Fellow, School of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland
    Alistair Grinham, Senior research fellow, The University of Queensland
    Badin Gibbes, Senior Lecturer, School of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland
    Javier Leon, Lecturer, University of the Sunshine Coast
    John Church, CSIRO Fellow, CSIRO
    Disclosure statement
    Simon Albert receives funding from ***The MacArthur Foundation and Australian Government.
    Alistair Grinham receives funding from ***The MacArthur Foundation and Australian Government…
    ETC ETC
    This is the first scientific evidence, published in Environmental Research Letters, that confirms the numerous anecdotal accounts from across the Pacific of the dramatic impacts of climate change on coastlines and people.
    A warning for the world
    http://theconversation.com/sea-level-rise-has-claimed-five-whole-islands-in-the-pacific-first-scientific-evidence-58511

    6 May: Environmental Research Letters: Interactions between sea-level rise and wave exposure on reef island dynamics in the Solomon Islands
    http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/5/054011

    00

  • #
    Lawrie

    You may be interested that the EU will not require the 10% biofuel content in transport fuels after 2020.

    http://www.euractiv.com/section/transport/news/green-transport-target-will-be-scrapped-post-2020-eu-confirms/

    Seems Green groups now realise biofuels damage the environment, reduce biodiversity and cause loss of habitat/forests.

    Congratulations because readers here have known that for over a decade. The US Navy uses biofuels in their aircraft so will they now scrap that idea since it costs considerably more to run a plane on plant derived ethanol rather than good old kerosene.

    10

  • #
    pat

    The Macarthur Foundation provided support for this survey, see second link posted.

    LOL. CAGW surveys by Yale/George Mason are always POLITICAL and UNBELIEVABLE. Alex Kirby ties it to the study under discussion in this thread:

    6 May: ClimateChangeNews: Alex Kirby: Half of Donald Trump’s supporters believe in global warming
    But a national survey of US voters has found that more than half of Trump supporters (56%) think global warming is happening − although almost all of them (55%) blame natural causes.
    And almost half of them (49%) think the US should reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, regardless of what other countries do.
    The survey findings are published in a report produced by the Yale Programme on Climate Change Communication (and George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication)…
    When it comes to funding more research into renewable energy, for example, 76% of Trump’s backers are in favour, and 70% of them think people who buy energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels should receive tax rebates…
    And more than half of all respondents – again, except Cruz supporters – favour requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax…
    While fewer than half of any candidate’s supporters realise that virtually all climate scientists agree that human-caused global warming is happening, only 3% of Trump backers understand the scientific consensus. Despite this, 35% of them say they are very or quite worried about global warming.
    ???Politics aside, some social scientists say Americans may be likelier to accept the scientific evidence if they believe the economy is strong…
    But those who were more critical of capitalism and more interested in social change recalled the information about climate change as being even more severe than the facts they had seen…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/06/half-of-donald-trumps-supporters-believe-in-global-warming/

    ???it’s impossible to put politics aside if you BELIEVE the economy is STRONG.

    4 May: Yale Programme on Climate Change Communication: Global Warming and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election
    By Anthony Leiserowitz, Edward Maibach, Connie Roser-Renouf, Geoff Feinberg and Seth Rosenthal
    Filed under: Beliefs & Attitudes and Policy & Politics
    Funding Sources
    The research was made possible by the generous support of The 11th Hour Project, the Energy Foundation, the Grantham Foundation, and ***The MacArthur Foundation
    Download Full Report (51 pages)
    http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/global-warming-u-s-presidential-election/2/

    11th Hour Project founder is Wendy Schmidt, wife of Google’s Eric Schmidt. part of the Schmidt Family Foundation, which provides grants to the Energy Foundation, Grist, etc.
    11th Hour provided initial operating budget for the nonprofit news organization Climate Central. (Wikipedia)

    00

  • #
    pat

    changing the rules again!

    6 May: ClimateChangeNews: Ed King: UN climate officials release negotiation plan through 2018
    Countries will not be excluded from talks for being slow to ratify Paris Agreement, say summit hosts
    That is the view of leading climate officials from France and Morocco, the two countries charged with guiding international talks on curbing global warming, in a plan for the talks published on Friday.
    It suggests the European Union’s 28 member states will still have a say in the formation of the deal, despite fears Brussels will not be able to formally approve the treaty till late 2017.
    “We consider that no Party should be disadvantaged or excluded from the collective development of the rulebook of the Paris Agreement simply because it is still in the process of joining the Agreement,” says a letter from the French and Moroccan presidencies of the climate talks…
    UN climate negotiations resume in Bonn on 16 May, scheduled to last for two weeks.
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/06/un-climate-officials-release-negotiation-plan-through-2018/

    ***whatever happened to?

    PDF: 4 pages: April 2016: German Institute for International and Security Affairs: After the Paris Agreement
    New Challenges for the EU’s Leader
    by Susanne Droge and Oliver Geden
    Because of its internal division, the EU and its 28 Member States are not likely to ratify the Paris Agreement soon…
    ***In the likely case that the PA enters into force prior to EU ratification, the EU will not be allowed to participate in initial decision-making over the many rules and procedures needed for the implementation of the Paris Agreement…
    http://www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/comments/2016C19_dge_gdn.pdf

    00

  • #
    pat

    5 May: Daily Caller: Chris White: Most Americans Apparently Know Nothing About Obama’s Climate
    A poll conducted by the University of Maryland shows most Americans have either never heard of President Barack Obama’s climate plan or know little about the president’s overarching environmental regulations.
    “The Clean Power Plan is not a household word in America just yet,” a survey from the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation showing Americans’ views of the climate plan.
    The poll lends some credence to arguments suggesting that most Americans do not consider global warming a pressing issue, despite campaigns by environmentalists, such as California billionaire Tom Steyer, to foist concerns of global warming into the election’s spotlight…
    The poll found that nearly 70 percent, or 69 percent, of respondents were either unaware of Obama’s so-called Clean Power Plan…
    Steven Kull, director of the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy, and co-author of the poll, said he was not surprised the Environmental Protection Agency-administered climate rule hasn’t made any headway this political season.
    “It’s sort of blandly titled,” Kull said. “I don’t think the reporting on it has been very extensive. It hasn’t gotten into the elections, and so I don’t find it so surprising.”…
    In a separate Wednesday survey of Texas voters, 85 percent of people surveyed had not “seen, read or heard of a federal policy called the Clean Power Plan.”
    The Supreme Court decided in February not to allow the EPA to implement the president’s plan…
    Only six percent of the respondents have heard a great deal about the plan, while 24 percent said they had heard some talk about Obama’s climate regulations. The findings were the same regardless the respondents’ political party affiliation.
    http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/05/most-americans-apparently-know-nothing-about-obamas-climate-plan/

    nonetheless, the spooky Uni of Maryland poll comes up with plenty of positive spin for action etc., as per the Yale/Geo Mason one:

    May 2016: PDF: 34 pages: Program for Public Consultation, School of Public Policy, Uni of Maryland:
    CONSIDERING THE COST OF CLEAN
    Americans on Energy, Air Quality and Climate
    Primary Investigator: Steven Kull
    Research Staff: Clay Ramsay, Evan Lewis and Antje Williams
    Cruz and Trump supporters also diverged from other candidate supporters in opposing the Clean
    Power Plan. However, majorities of all groups converged in their support for government assistance
    for coal workers who lose their jobs, and in their opposition to government funding of sequestration.
    If such mitigating steps are taken to protect coal workers and/or the coal industry, a majority of Trump
    supporters and just over 50% of Cruz supporters say they would then support the Clean Power Plan.
    One of the more divisive issues was a carbon tax. Large majorities of supporters of Democratic
    candidates favored it, while large majorities of supporters of Republican candidates opposed it. If the
    income generated by a carbon tax were used to offset the impact of a carbon tax on people with low to
    middle incomes, support for a carbon tax becomes a very slight majority among Kasich supporters, but
    not among Trump or Cruz supporters…
    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project is supported by generous grants from the Democracy Fund, Hewlett Foundation,
    ***Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Circle Foundation.
    http://www.publicconsultation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Energy-Survey.pdf

    Kull does world surveys for BBC, with results such as this one in 2007:

    Most Would Pay Higher Energy Bills to Address Climate Change Says Global Poll
    Most people say they are ready to make personal sacrifices – including paying more for their energy – to help address climate change, according to a new BBC World Service poll of 22,000 people in 21 countries.
    The survey was conducted for BBC World Service by the international polling firm GlobeScan together with the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland…
    Director of PIPA, Steven Kull said, “People around the world recognize that climate change requires that people change their behaviour. And that to provide incentives for those changes there will need to be an increase in the cost of energy that contributes to climate change.” …
    http://www.globescan.com/news_archives/bbc_climate2/

    more:

    2006: 30-Country Poll Finds Worldwide Consensus that Climate Change is a Serious Problem
    Concern Growing Sharply
    Since Katrina, Americans No Longer See Unusual Weather as Natural

    2011: Publics Around the World Call for Greater Efforts to Address Climate Change
    Steven Kull, director of PIPA commented, “There seems to substantial support for action.”

    i see all these surveys/polls as attempts to co-opt Trump into supporting the CAGW scam.

    00

  • #
    mike restin

    Only if it helps “Make America Great Again”

    00

  • #
    Dave in the States

    Only the wealthy can afford to be “green” but they eventually fail too.

    I’m reminded of the wealthy green that chartered a Lear Jet to pick up this greenie in the green’s home town and fly this greenie to a small resort town. The jet had to fly 6 hours to arrive at the place to pick the greenie up and then fly 5 hours to the resort. After arriving in the small resort town, this person become dismayed and angry over the fact that the small resort town had no hybrid or EV green vehicle for the greenie to rent. This person would have to make do with a regular gasoline powered vehicle, as recall an “evil” SUV. This person was so worried about how much larger this person’s “carbon foot print” would be as the result of driving an SUV for a few days. No thought was given to the disparity of a few tens of gallons of gasoline compared to several thousand pounds of jet fuel. Not that I think burning several thousands of pounds of jet fuel, or tens of gallons of gasoline, is bad thing since I know that co2 emissions are harmless to the environment.

    What is most troubling about the few people that can afford to be green is that they demand it, and seek to force it, of those who can’t.

    00