Successful House Climate Hearings…Rep. McKinley: Denying The Poor Affordable Energy Is “An Abuse Of Authority”

McKinleyThe purpose of the House Climate Change Hearing is to shed light on the question of: How much is man contributing to climate change, and how responsible is Obama’s energy policy?

So far the skeptics feel that the hearing has been successful in communicating their case to the public. The office of Rep. David McKinley P.E. (photo right) has distributed his remarks and graphics on the subject:

– CO2 is undeniably increasing.
– Some scientists and climatologists say their energy models reflect that CO2 levels coincide with temperature increases.
– But here’s a chart with 73 models and actual observations:

73 climate models_reality

Not a single climate model has been correct so far. Warming has been minor.

– Temperatures have been at a virtual standstill for the past 40 years while CO2 levels have increased.
– In fact Arctic sea ice has grown 60% despite increased CO2 levels.
– And if that was not enough, the ice surrounding Antarctica is also expanding.
– The United Nations’ reports also indicates that “most experts believe that by 2083, the benefits of climate change may still outweigh the harm.”

Arctic 2013pdf

Chart provided by the office of DAVID B. MCKINLEY, P.E.

McKinley adds “that even if the U.S. stopped all its coal-fired power plants, CO2 levels would be reduced by merely two tenths of one percent globally” and that “the Obama Administration fails to tell the American people that 96% of emitted annually occurs naturally“. Also Obama does not tell us that its proposed regulations “would cast hundreds of thousands of workers out of work” while doing nothing noticeable for the environment.

CO2 emissions

Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Energy Information Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency

Rep. McKinley also says “the rest of the world is not listening to the President’s energy policy” and that “China, India, Russia and Europe are all expanding their use of coal“.

Ensuring affordable energy to the poor is a moral imperative

Worse, McKinley points out that Obama’s proposed policy will hurt the poorest and most vulnerable on the planet:

Nations struggling to come out of poverty will continue to suffer, lives will be lost and children will be sick and perish as a result of the President’s support on this policy.”

McKinley adds that “one of the biggest moral responsibilities for the United States should be help emerging nations out of poverty” and that this can be done using “the most abundant and affordable source of power: coal“. Access to affordable energy is absolutely essential.

McKinley asks citizens:

Please take this message back to your agencies: This President must not prevent people around the globe from obtaining affordable, dependable energy; and threatening American workers and businesses with the loss of affordable energy from coal and natural gas is not an acceptable energy policy. Crushing America’s economy to reduce CO2 by 0.2% is an abuse of this Administration’s authority.”

McKinley photo source above: mckinley.house.gov/.

 

10 responses to “Successful House Climate Hearings…Rep. McKinley: Denying The Poor Affordable Energy Is “An Abuse Of Authority””

  1. pyeatte

    Excellent point. The far-left is trying to crush our economy by continuing the effort to artificially maximize the cost of oil, gas and coal. If we allow them to be successful, it would result in global deindustrialization, which would mean depression, misery and death on a massive scale.

  2. John F. Hultquist

    Rep. McKinley also says “the rest of the world is not listening to the President’s energy policy”

    . . . the rest of the world is not listening to the President.

    There, I fixed it for Rep. McKinley. He can donate my editing fee to Alzheimer research.

  3. Walter H. Schneider

    From the article: “- Temperatures have been at a virtual standstill for the past 40 years while CO2 levels have increased.
    – In fact Arctic sea ice has grown 60% despite increased CO2 levels.
    – And if that was not enough, the ice surrounding Antarctica is also expanding. ”

    The first of those statements is objectively true, while the 2nd one should read: “- In fact Arctic sea ice has grown [by] 60% [as of August of 2013, compared to August 2012,] despite increased CO2 levels.”

    The 3rd of those statements should have indicated that winter sea-ice extent around antartica experienced an increasing trend for about 40 years and is presently at its maximum extent since records were kept.

    It is commendable that Rep. McKinley and others have joined the skeptics of global warming alarmism, but it is regrettable that they did not do so all along or at least many years sooner. After all, the sentiment that “Ensuring affordable energy to the poor is a moral imperative” is a universal truth and was true for all of the past 40 years.

    Nevertheless, the poor are suffering now due to increasingly destructive energy policies that were implemented during the decades of global warming alarmism. They will keep on suffering until those policies are reversed. We need more than sentiments to make that happen.

  4. Ferdinand Engelbeen

    One comment:

    Whil it is true that 99.8% of all CO2 emissions in the US is not from coal, that is irrelevant for the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere, as (near) 100% of the sink capacity of forests in and oceans near the US is natural. The 0.2% from coal (and the release from oil and gas) is additional, not simply cycling through the atmosphere…
    Not that I am worried by the increase, but one need to use the right arguments…

  5. Ike
    1. DirkH

      Noteworthy: poll shows Warmists in Germany dropped from 61% to 39% of population.

      1. DirkH

        …between 2006 and 2013.

      2. Bernd Felsche

        Still too many dupes.

    2. Bernd Felsche

      Thanks for that link, Ike.

      I picked out a couple of paragraphs for a comment at Joanne Nova’s blog.

      I notice that Spiegel magazine makes it quite clear that the SPM will be a result of politics; first a negotiation with the scientists as to the contents and secondly, the emissaries sent forth by many governments to ensure that “the right messages” will be communicated in the SPM.

      Will the interim delegate from Myanmar be in the room? 😉

  6. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That?