Tag Archives: #Climapocrisy

Posted on by

Bad causes attract bad people

This might be more in William Teach’s wheelhouse than mine, but when this article came up in my feeds, I couldn’t resist. From London’s The Telegraph:

Gen Z’s hypocrisy on climate change has made Greta Thunberg look a fool

If her generation are so worried about the ‘climate emergency’, explain the findings of this new poll

by Michael Deacon | Tuesday, February 18, 2025 | 7:00 AM GMT

At the UN Climate Action Summit of 2019, a 16-year-old Greta Thunberg gave the most famous speech of her young life. I’m sure we all remember. It was the one in which she indignantly squeaked “How DARE you!” at older generations for ruining their grandchildren’s future.

“You are failing us!” she hissed. “But the young people are starting to understand your betrayal. The eyes of all future generations are upon you. And if you choose to fail us, I say: we will never forgive you!”

If you are stymied by The Telegraph’s paywall, you can access it here for free.

Chastening stuff. In hindsight, however, I can’t help feeling that Greta’s ire may have been somewhat misplaced. Because it turns out that the young are wrecking the planet, too. In fact, they may be doing even more to wreck it than their grandparents.

Just look at the results of a new poll by the Civil Aviation Authority. It found that those aged 18-34 fly a lot more frequently than those aged 55 and over. In the past year, almost three quarters of the former group travelled by plane, compared with only half of the latter group.

Also see: William Teach, “Bummer: Asset Managers Have Low Interest In Climate (scam) Proposals“

That seems kind of odd, given that those of us in our senior years normally have more money than younger people.

This may seem unexpected, given that members of Greta’s generation are always telling pollsters – and everyone else who will listen – how terrified they are about climate change. But then, perhaps we shouldn’t be so surprised. In 2023, a poll by YouGov found that young adults did less recycling than Baby Boomers. They were also less likely to save water, wash their clothes at low temperatures, and switch off electric lights when leaving a room.

Yeah, that one gets me, since I’m the only one who ever turns out the light in the pantry! But perhaps you can guess who pays the electricity bill here?

Greta Thunberg at yet another pro-Hamas demonstration.

And that might be the reason the young whippersnappers — I’m just a couple of months shy of my 72nd birthday, so “young whippersnappers” is a perfectly acceptable description for me to use — don’t turn out the lights. How many of them actually pay their own sparktricity bills? CNBC reported, on November 17, 2024 — after the election, but while Joe Biden was still President, “Approximately 1 in 3 U.S. adults ages 18 to 34 live in their parents’ home, according to U.S. Census Bureau data.” If mom and dad are still paying the electric bill, why would their kids be all that concerned with turning off the lights when the room is empty?

Much of the opposition to the activists’ proposals to fight global warming climate change is not due to disbelief in that change, but due to the tremendous costs those proposals would impose on taxpayers.

Mr Deacon does point out that the lovely Miss Thunberg has seemed more interested these days in wearing a ‘Palestinian’ keffiyeh and attending anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas demonstrations. But, as has been said by many other people in the past, bad causes attract bad people.

You might not think that supporting efforts to fight climate change is a bad cause, but, if you support Hamas, if you wear a ‘Palestinian’ keffiyeh, you might as well be wearing a Nazi armband or Ku Klux Klan robes.

Posted on by

That this has led to fraud is no surprise at all!

My good friend and occasional blog pinch-hitter, William Teach of The Pirate’s Cove, has an article this Friday morning on the Biden Administration prosecuting a major ‘carbon offset’ sales company for fraud:

C-Quest Capital LLC Chief Executive Officer Kenneth Newcombe, who stepped down as CEO in February, was indicted Wednesday in New York on wire fraud and commodities fraud charges. He faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted on the most serious charges.

C-Quest develops emission-reduction projects to earn carbon credits that can then be sold to companies or other entities that wish to offset their own emissions. Newcombe, a onetime Goldman Sachs Group Inc. managing director and World Bank official, founded C-Quest in 2008.

You can read the rest on Mr Teach’s fine site.

But this one speaks to me, due to my experience. It was 2003, and carbon offset salesmen came and made a presentation to the concrete company at which I worked. Ready-mixed concrete producers use pozzolans, materials which are not cementitious alone but when mixed with Portland cement during the production of concrete utilize the excess calcium hydroxide liberated to become cementitious. We use them because they are less expensive than cement. The two most frequently used are flyash, which is harvested from the ignition byproducts of burning coal in power plants, and ground granulated blast furnace slag, the material left over from the smelting of iron ore.

The manufacture of Portland cement is a major carbon dioxide (CO2) emitter, so by the partial substitution of flyash, ready-mix companies reduce their carbon footprint. The salesmen told us that we could gain carbon credits every time we used flyash instead of cement, and that we could sell those carbon credits to other companies, to make it look like they were doing something to help fight global warming climate change, but, since it wouldn’t have changed how we did business since we were already using flyash — other than requiring some bookkeeping — it wouldn’t have reduced CO2 emissions at all! It was simply a way to take money, taking it from one CO2 emitter and giving it to a company which emitted less CO2; virtue signaling for the first, without having to actually spend significantly more money to reduce their emissions, and extra money for us, for doing what was already in our own economic interest.

Is anyone really surprised that fraud would be involved? When it comes to global warming climate change, the scammers and fraudsters will always be buzzing around.

Posted on by

NIMBY! Don’t build your damned solar farm next to my neighborhood!

Lexington/Fayette County, Kentucky, was one of the only two, out of 120, counties in the Bluegrass State to cast a majority of their ballots in 2020 for Joe Biden. The good people of Lexington — the city comprises the entire county — gave 90,600 votes, 59.25% of the total, to Sundowner Joe, compared to 58,860, or 38.49%, to President Donald Trump. That was a slightly higher percentage for Mr Biden than the Commonwealth’s largest city/county, Louisville/Jefferson County’s 58.87%.

So, with so many, many people on the liberal side of the political spectrum, you’d think that Lexingtonians would support Mr Biden’s policies, right? Continue reading →

Posted on by

The left are pro-choice on exactly one thing

There was a subscriber comment on an article in The Washington Post on the political polarization of plug in electric vehicles that made me chuckle. The commenter styling himself oneofmanyopinions wrote:

I’m not a tree hugger, but every time I hear a Republican, such as Bill Barr, say things like “they want to take our gas stoves” as justification to vote for Trump, I know I’m witnessing ignorance at a high level.

I responded, noting that immediately to the right of the article was a blurb for one entitled “Gas stoves spread harmful pollution beyond the kitchen, study finds.” Continue reading →

Posted on by

NIMBY! Don’t you dare build windmills where we can see them from the beach!

In November of 2020, the good people of the Garden State gave 2,608,400 votes, 57.34% of the total, to Joe Biden, and only 1,883,313, or 41.40%, to President Trump. One would think, then, that New Jerseyites must approve of Mr Biden’s plans to develop alternative sources of energy to generate electricity, right?

Atlantic Shores offshore wind farm in New Jersey would have 157 turbines and be 8.4 miles from shore

The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management will begin an environmental review of the Atlantic Shores project on Monday.

by Wayne Perry, Associated Press | The Ides of March 2024 | 1:39 PM EDT

ATLANTIC CITY — An offshore wind power project proposed for New Jersey would have 157 turbines and be located 8.4 miles from shore at its closest point, data released by the federal government Friday shows.

The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management said it will begin an environmental review Monday of the Atlantic Shores project. It released key details of the project in announcing the environmental review.

New Jersey energy regulators approved Atlantic Shores’ 1,510 megawatt project in 2021. It would generate enough electricity to power more than 700,000 homes.

The federal agency said the project’s operations plan proposes two potential export cable corridors that would make landfall in Sea Girt, N.J., with a second one either in Asbury Park or in the New York City area, possibly on Staten Island.

But naturally, there are plenty of people who are opposed, because, Heaven forfend!, they might be able to see the tops of some of the turbines, and the power cables running onto the shore, and sea birds might be killed, etc, etc, etc.

The groups Protect Our Coast New Jersey and Defend Brigantine Beach and Downbeach filed an appeal to the approval last week in state court, saying that power contracts granted to the project developers violate state law that mandates that any increase in rates for offshore wind must be exceeded by economic and environmental benefits to the state.

In 2020, New Jersey generated 65,060,636 MegaWatt hours of electricity, but used 74,442,735 MWh, meaning that the Garden State imported 14.42% of its total electricity consumption. With an average retail price of 14.80¢ per kWh, electricity was 19.74% higher than the national average of 12.36¢/kWh. Just as an economic calculation, one would think that the good, liberal voters of New Jersey would want this project. But no, they would prefer to import electricity from Pennsylvania, which exports 39.29% of the electricity it generates — primarily by burning natural gas — and West Virginia, which exports 41.79% of the electricity it generates, primarily by burning coal. Much better to do that than to possibly see the tops of the windmill blades from the beach!

Liberal New Jersey will need the electricity, too. As William Teach reported, the state plans to ban all fossil-fueled new car sales by 2035, the New Jersey Star-Ledger is demanding quicker action than that, and the majority of the voters in that heavily “blue” state just don’t want plug-in electric vehicles.

They will be made to comply, but they don’t want the sparktricity that they use generated anyplace where they can see it.

Posted on by

How wealthy New Englanders fight #ClimateChange The well-to-do sure love their gas appliances!

This article title, “How wealthy New Englanders fight #ClimateChange” is one we have used thrice previously. In the first, we noted the PBS television series This Old House and its renovation of the Seaside Victorian Cottage, in Narragansett, Rhode Island. Those wealthy New Englanders didn’t choose electric heat pumps, but warm, dependable gas heating for the cold, Rhode Island winters. Their HVAC system appears to allow the large, new exterior condensers to be used for heating as well, but the gas furnace is new and in place. The homeowners had a new, fairly sizable gas fireplace installed, an oversized Wolf gas range, and three gas-fired instant hot water heaters. More, they had a gas fireplace installed outside, on their backyard patio. The series was filmed following the panicdemic[1]This is not a typographical error, but spelled exactly as I saw the whole thing, an exercise in pure, unreasoning panic. restrictions of 2020. Continue reading →

References

References
↑1 This is not a typographical error, but spelled exactly as I saw the whole thing, an exercise in pure, unreasoning panic.
Posted on by

It was -4.1º Fahrenheit on the farm this morning.

When I arose, at 7:05 this morning, it was -4.1º Fahrenheit outside. No wind is showing, but there’s a possibility that the anemometer is frozen in place; I’ll tap it loose when I go outside.

I have previously noted that we have backup heat here on the farm, with a propane fireplace, something we installed during our 2018 remodeling project, because our primary heat is an electric heat pump. The thermostat for the fireplace was set at 64º F, so that it would come on if the primary heat failed overnight, but shouldn’t come on as long as the heat pump was engaged. Guess what: even though the primary heat was on and working, the fireplace still came on, which tells me that the heat pump was unable to keep up! Heat pumps work by extracting heat from the atmosphere around the outside condenser, but when there’s not a lot of heat to extract, they lose efficiency. Continue reading →

Posted on by

You go, girl! Go ahead and hurt your own cause! Climate activist Greta Thunberg goes all out anti-Semitism

We have previously noted the definition of “intersectionality,” and how the perhaps less than genius thinkers on the left misuse it to tell us that all leftist causes are related, mixing together things which would curdle new milk. An interesting example is the mixing of feminism and transgenderism, hich leads to the amusing fact that, at least in some things, the best woman for the job is a man male.

Now, William Teach’s sort of favorite whipping girl, Greta “How dare you!” Thunberg, has hurt her own cause by mixing it with today’s oh-so-popular anti-Semitism. From The Times of Israel:

Climate activist Thunberg flogged for ‘crush Zionism’ chant

by Canaan Lidor | Tuesday, Kislev 15, 5784 | 6:23 PM Jerusalem Time

Footage showing climate activist Greta Thunberg chanting “crush Zionism” at a recent pro-Palestinian rally in Sweden is provoking harsh-worded criticism of her by prominent Jewish environmentalists.

If you can’t access the Times website, you can find the story here as well. You can see the original of the tweet here, which shows you the video, not just thye still in the screen capture I took ands used.

The actions by Thunberg, whom many regard as a symbol of the environmentalist movement, reflect how “large parts of ‘the left’ or ‘progressives’ have been intellectually captured by a naive, distorted and frankly bigoted anti-Zionism,” Nigel Savage, a UK-born environmental activist and founder of Jewish environmental nonprofit organization Hazon, tells The Times of Israel Tuesday.

Savage, whose Jerusalem-based group was established in 2000 and holds environmentally oriented bike rides in New York, adds: “It is a microcosm of a far larger and far greater challenge. It’s sad and disturbing.”

Now I will admit it: I can kind of see Miss Thunberg’s reasoning. In saying that Israel should be crushed, she is taking the side of poverty and savagery over prosperity and Western civilization, and if there’s one thing the global warming climate change activists hate, it’s prosperity and Western civilization, despite the fact that they are living with the benefits of prosperity and Western civilization.

I will admit to wondering how Miss Thunberg got from her native Sweden to Amsterdam without the use of fossil fuels, or from where the puffy coat and its insulation came without the use of petroleum, but I’m hardly the first person to point out her climapocrisy.

Miss Thunberg, of course, has the freedom of speech, and can say any fool thing she wishes, but I am amuse by the fact that she is hurting her own cause by siding against Israel and Jews, Jews who just might be the voters who put the Democrats over the top to control Congress and get the climate policies she wants enacted into law.

So, you go, girl! Go ahead and hurt your own cause.

 

Posted on by

How wealthy New Englanders fight #ClimateChange

We have previously noted how the wealthy New England homeowners featured in the Public Broadcasting System’s famous, long-running This Old House series, from areas which gave the large majority of their votes to the Democrats, still love them some fossil fuels.

It was season 43 for This Old House series, and yet another set of wealthy New England homeowners were remodeling, very extensively remodeling an 1880s Cape Cod style home, outside of Concord, Massachusetts. In the 2020 presidential election, Middlesex County, in which Concord is located, gave 617,196 votes, or 71.00% of the total, to former Vice President Joe Biden, and just 226,956 votes, or 26.11%, to President Donald Trump. That was an even stronger margin than the statewide 65.60% to 32.14% margin.

It’s safe to say that Bay Staters are very strongly liberal Democrats.

Season 43 for This Old House came after the COVID-19 panicdemic had mostly waned, and I saw only one person in the series wearing a face mask, telling me that much of the panicdemic restrictions had been removed. episode 13, “Race to the finish,” first broadcast on January 6, 2022 was well after Mr Biden and his liberal environmental and global warming climate change policies were in place.

So, what did these wealthy homeowners in Massachusetts do? In episode 13, we saw an older gas-fired boiler for the heating system replaced by a new, more efficient, but still natural gas fired boiler. Episode 16, “Cinderella Story,” shows how the homeowners had installed a high end, professional gas stove. There was a corner unit gas fireplace briefly shown, as well as a restored wood-burning fireplace more prominently featured. It seems that the wealthy New Englanders who have supported politicians and policies which would deprive the commoners, the working-class, of gas appliances, aren’t quite so eager to sacrifice their own comfort and own lifestyles.

Of course, I do not know how these particular homeowners voted; perhaps they were among the 26.11% of Middlesex County voters smart enough to vote for President Trump rather than the dummkopf from Delaware. But it sure seems that the climate activists are very busy telling people to do as they say, not do as they do.