Monday, April 30, 2007

Carbon Offset Scam

Industry caught in carbon ‘smokescreen’

By Fiona Harvey and Stephen Fidler in London
Published: April 25 2007 22:07 Last updated: April 25 2007 22:07

Companies and individuals rushing to go green have been spending millions on “carbon credit” projects that yield few if any environmental benefits.

A Financial Times investigation has uncovered widespread failings in the new markets for greenhouse gases, suggesting some organisations are paying for emissions reductions that do not take place.

Others are meanwhile making big profits from carbon trading for very small expenditure and in some cases for clean-ups that they would have made anyway. The growing political salience of environmental politics has sparked a “green gold rush”, which has seen a dramatic expansion in the number of businesses offering both companies and individuals the chance to go “carbon neutral”, offsetting their own energy use by buying carbon credits that cancel out their contribution to global warming.

The burgeoning regulated market for carbon credits is expected to more than double in size to about $68.2bn by 2010, with the unregulated voluntary sector rising to $4bn in the same period.

The FT investigation found:

■ Widespread instances of people and organisations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions.

■ Industrial companies profiting from doing very little – or from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited substantially.

■ Brokers providing services of questionable or no value.

■ A shortage of verification, making it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits.

■ Companies and individuals being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value because they do not result in emissions cuts.

Francis Sullivan, environment adviser at HSBC, the UK’s biggest bank that went carbon-neutral in 2005, said he found “serious credibility concerns” in the offsetting market after evaluating it for several months. “The police, the fraud squad and trading standards need to be looking into this. Otherwise people will lose faith in it,” he said. These concerns led the bank to ignore the market and fund its own carbon reduction projects directly.

Some companies are benefiting by asking “green” consumers to pay them for cleaning up their own pollution. For instance, DuPont, the chemicals company, invites consumers to pay $4 to eliminate a tonne of carbon dioxide from its plant in Kentucky that produces a potent greenhouse gas called HFC-23. But the equipment required to reduce such gases is relatively cheap.

DuPont refused to comment and declined to specify its earnings from the project, saying it was at too early a stage to discuss. The FT has also found examples of companies setting up as carbon offsetters without appearing to have a clear idea of how the markets operate. In response to FT inquiries about its sourcing of carbon credits, one company, carbonvoucher.com, said it had not taken payments for offsets.

Blue Source, a US offsetting company, invites consumers to offset carbon emissions by investing in enhanced oil recovery, which pumps carbon dioxide into depleted oil wells to bring up the remaining oil. However, Blue Source said that because of the high price of oil, this process was often profitable in itself, meaning operators were making extra revenues from selling “carbon credits” for burying the carbon. There is nothing illegal in these practices. However, some companies that are offsetting their emissions have avoided such projects because customers may find them controversial.

BP said it would not buy credits resulting from improvements in industrial efficiency or from most renewable energy projects in developed countries.

Thursday, April 26, 2007

Come Fly With Me


2008 Candidates Rely on Private Jets

By JIM KUHNHENN
Associated Press Writer
April 26, 2007, 6:44 PM EDT

WASHINGTON -- A flock of small jets took flight from Washington Thursday, each carrying a Democratic presidential candidate to South Carolina for the first debate of the political season. For Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, it was wheels up shortly after they voted in favor of legislation requiring that U.S. troops begin returning home from Iraq in the fall.


No one jet pooled, no one took commercial flights to save money, fuel or emissions.

Monday, April 23, 2007

More Nonsense from the Global Warming Left


Crow calls for limit on loo paper

"I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting."

- Sheryl Crow

Singer Sheryl Crow has said a ban on using too much toilet paper should be introduced to help the environment.

Crow has suggested using "only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required".

The 45-year-old, who made the comments on her website, has just toured the US on a biodiesel-powered bus to raise awareness about climate change. She teamed up with environmental activist Laurie David for the shows. The pair targeted 11 university campuses to persuade students to help combat the world's environmental problems.

"I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming," Crow wrote. "Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in my mind, worth investigating.


Laurie David's husband, Seinfeld creator Larry David, also appeared. Crow has also commented on her website about how she thinks paper napkins "represent the height of wastefulness". She has designed a clothing line with what she calls a "dining sleeve". The sleeve is detachable and can be replaced with another "dining sleeve" after the diner has used it to wipe his or her mouth.

The shows involved a short set by the singer, a talk by David and segments of Al Gore's environmental film An Inconvenient Truth.



Toilet paper and paper napkins: the left's version of weapons of mass destruction.

Friday, April 20, 2007

Thursday, April 19, 2007

If It Bleeds ...



Backlash Leads to Pullback on Cho Video

Apr 19 02:31 PM US/Eastern

By DAVID BAUDER

AP Television Writer



NEW YORK (AP) - With a backlash developing against the media for airing sickening pictures from Virginia Tech shooter Cho Seung-Hui, Fox News Channel said Thursday it would stop and other networks said they would severely limit their use.


NBC News was the recipient Wednesday of Cho's package of rambling, hate-filled video and written messages, with several pictures of him posing with a gun. Contents began airing on "Nightly News," and its rivals quickly used them, too.


Family members of victims canceled plans to appear on NBC's "Today" show Thursday because they "were very upset" with the network for showing the pictures, "Today" host Meredith Vieira said.


Virginia State Police Col. Steve Flaherty—who praised NBC Wednesday for coming to authorities first with the package—said Thursday he was disappointed with what the network showed. "I just hate that a lot of people not used to seeing that type of image had to see it," he said.


NBC said the material was aired because it helped to answer the question of why Cho killed 32 people and himself on the Virginia Tech campus Monday. "The decision to run this video was reached by virtually every news organization in the world, as evidenced by coverage on television, on Web sites and in newspapers," NBC said in a statement. "We have covered this story—and our unique role in it—with extreme sensitivity, underscored by our devoted efforts to remember and honor the victims and heroes of this tragic incident."




How did NBC "honor the victims and heroes of this tragic incident" by broadcasting mass murderer Cho Seung-Hui's deranged rantings to the whole world? The truth is that the news media in general and NBC in particular victimized the survivors and the families of the slain all over again.

"I Feel Pretty"

Edwards Reimbuses Campaign for Haircuts

Apr 19 11:33 AM US/Eastern
By NEDRA PICKLER
Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrat John Edwards is trying to get out of a hairy situation, reimbursing his presidential campaign $800 for two visits with a Beverly Hills stylist.

Two $400 cuts by stylist Joseph Torrenueva, who told The Associated Press that the former North Carolina senator is a longtime client, showed up on Edwards' campaign spending reports filed this weekend. Edwards spokesman Eric Schultz said it never should have been there. "The bill was sent to the campaign. It was inadvertently paid," Schultz said. "John Edwards will be reimbursing the campaign."

Edwards is also the subject of a popular YouTube spoof poking fun at his youthful good looks. The video shows the candidate combing his tresses to the dubbed-in tune of "I Feel Pretty."

Federal Election Commission records show Edwards' campaign also spent $250 in services from Designworks Salon in Dubuque, Iowa, and $225 in services from the Pink Sapphire in Manchester, N.H. Schultz said those services were legitimate campaign expenditures to prepare Edwards for media appearances.

Political candidates often have hair and makeup done before media appearances. Edwards rival Hillary Rodham Clinton got some attention last year when her campaign paid $2,500 for two hairstyling sessions that the campaign classified as media production expenses.

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Gore Heckled, Jeered in Canada

Sebastien Cadieux & Brian Hastien
The Brock Report

MONTREAL (CUP) - Concordia president Claude Lajeunesse was booed as he took the stage to give Al Gore an honorary doctorate from the university on March 22.

The brainchild of Concordia Student Union president Khaleed Juma, the doctorate was presented while the crowd, present to listen to speeches from Gore and David Suzuki, filed out the exits after the question and answer period with Gore was cancelled.

The talk took place in the cadre of Less Talk, More Action: A Youth Action Summit on Climate Change, organized by Youth Action Montreal members and Concordia University students Peter Schiefke and Mohamed Shuriye.

Gore and Suzuki's message was clear: The world is in imminent danger if we continue our current habits and don't change towards a more eco-friendly society.The former U.S. vice-president's speech was effectively his Academy Award-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth with updated statistics, and presented by an angrier, fist-shaking Gore.


His presentation was halted at least twice as opponents to his agenda began to shout out.They called him a liar and a villain, and screamed, "What about your swimming pools?" in regards to recent allegations that the monthly electricity bill of Gore's estate rivalled a year's bill for the average American home.




That Was Then and This is Now

THEN


Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler in 1938

"We should seek by all means in our power to avoid war, by analyzing possible causes, by trying to remove them, by discussion in a spirit of collaboration and good will. I cannot believe that such a program would be rejected by the people of this country, even if it does mean the establishment of personal contact with the dictators."
-- Neville Chamberlain (March 18, 1869-November 9, 1940)


NOW

Nancy Pelosi and Bashar Assad in 2007

"We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace."

--Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, after meeting with Syrian President Bashar Assad.