They’re coming for us, and stripping away our right of self defense is just a small part of it

Stymied by Congress, Barry Hussein readies administrative regulations to shut down the economy.

Barack Obama cannot deliver on his promise to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 17% without decisive new actions, a report warned on Wednesday.

America’s greenhouse gas emissions have fallen under Obama [while Obama has been in power, yes, but despite the man, not because of him - Ed] , as power plants burn less coal. But the country will still fall short of his commitment to a 17% reduction by the end of the decade, the report from the World Resources Institute said.

The president offered the 17% cut at the Copenhagen climate summit in 2009. But if Obama wants to make good on that commitment and the sweeping climate promises of his inauguration day address, he will have to tighten rules on coal-fired power plants and on the natural gas industry, the report said.

“The key point to us is that the US is not on track to hit the 17% target,” said Nicholas Bianco, the lead author of the report.

It will be an even greater stretch for America to meet its mid-century target. The report said America would not meet the 2050 target of an 80% cut in emissions without action from Congress.

But the WRI said Obama had it within his power to put the country on a course to meet the 2020 goal, by tightening Environmental Protection Agency rules for coal-fired power plants, reducing methane leaks from natural gas drilling, and raising the efficiency standards on household appliances.

“We are encouraged to find there are the tools available to get there without Congress,” Bianco said. “The other encouraging sign is that the administration appears to be ready to tackle climate in the second term.”

A number of environmental organisations have put forward climate action plans, mostly targetting carbon dioxide emissions from ageing power plants. Activists have urged Obama to block the Keystone XL pipeline project to pump crude from the Alberta tar sands as a sign of his commitment.

The warning from WRI follows encouraging signs that America was reducing its carbon dioxide pollution. The EPA reported on Tuesday that greenhouse gas emissions fell by 4.6% in 2011, because power plants were burning less coal.

But the move away from coal to natural gas, and to a far smaller extent renewables such as wind and solar power, would not on their own produce the cuts needed to prevent catastrophic climate change, WRI said.

Of course, our community organizer is not alone in his drive to impoverish the country and return it to the stone age. As usual, California regressives are already in the fray:

California greens waging all-out war against shale oil.

Massive shale oil reserves could give California one of the biggest oil booms on Earth, but the uber-powerful California green lobby is gearing up for the fight of its life.

The stakes of the battle could be huge, reports the New York Times. Hundreds of thousands of high-paying jobs for Californians, versus environmental concerns about fracking, pipelines, and greenhouse gasses.

The Monterey Shale formation, stretching 1,750 square miles from southern to central California, constitutes two-thirds of the country’s total estimated shale oil reserves. That’s an estimated 15.4 billion barrels, or four times as much as the Bakken Shale reserves in North Dakota, whose exploitation can now be seen from space.

But the green lobby will prove a formidable opponent to the oil and gas companies jostling for a piece of this giant pie. It is already hard at work trying to keep California’s newly recoverable energy reserves in the ground: Two powerhouse lobbies are suing the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of Conservation to prevent further exploration of the Monterey Shale and impose stricter regulations on fracking.

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

7 responses to “They’re coming for us, and stripping away our right of self defense is just a small part of it

  1. Publius

    We should just simply bulldoze everything that is man made on the Continent and take out about 80% of the US population, because if you take their logic to the ultimate end, that is the only way the US could possibly reach an absurd 80% reduction target.

    The World Resource Institute (WRI) is another feel good NGO that has the usual suspects on the board (Yes, Mr. Al- Jazeera Gore) and the rent seeking corporate appeasers who prefer to feed the beast than confront it.

    Mr. Nicholas Bianco (http://www.wri.org/profile/nicholas-bianco) is the poster child for the fresh faced do-gooder whom armed with a Master in Environmental Studies (Studies not Science) from Brown University (pass-fail no grades alleged Ivy League Institution of higher learning) is encouraged by the shredding of our Constitutional system of checks and balances. Certainly, Brown University would never offer courses on this topic because it would interfere with Women’s Gender Studies and other important topics that bash capitalism, innovation, technology (unless its an iProduct) and human freedom from tyranny.

    As much as these naive Dan and Dolly Dogooders deserve our scorn, they are the unrelenting face of the elite that now dominate much of the thinking that gets full coverage in the modern media. I have never witnessed so many intellectually bankrupted individuals actively attempting to trample our rights and freedoms with very little resistance by a large swath of our citizens.

  2. kc

    The folks in California seem to have no problem in figuring out how to use energy but some of them don’t seem to want to get their boots too dirty having to produce energy. Leave that to the hinterland. I guess the other thing the enters my mind is related to Publius’ comment above. How much are the average folks really willing to give up? They’ve been told that they are good citizens when they use cloth shopping bags (ignore the bacteria growth, please) and sort the plastic and aluminum and so they do all that with a spirit of good will but what about when the powers that be tell them to give up a spacious house or to trade the SUV for an electric car? I don’t think that some of the environmentalists with whom I’ve crossed paths would be happy with even those steps. I will admit that I’m talking about the more extreme here but I’ve concluded that some wouldn’t be satisfied until we’re living in trees or caves and foraging for food.

  3. Pinzgauer

    never mind self defense. What about the right and duty (of which the Declaration of Independence talks multiple times)to overthrow an overbearing government?
    With pitch forks again?
    I don’t think the French would come to the rescue again.

  4. Green Mtn Punter

    It certainly appears that the Moonbats are pushing toward a showdown. Are there anough Patriots left to defend liberty by force if necessary? Who wants to be the first to die for the born again American Republic? What/When will the Boston Massacre occur this time around? Bunker Hill? Paul Revere’s Ride?

    • Anonymous

      “The people don’t like to be conquered, sir, and so they will not be. Free men cannot start a war, but once it is started, they can fight on in defeat. Herd men, followers of a leader, cannot do that, and so it is always the herd men who win battles and the free men who win wars. You will find that is so, sir.”
      – John Steinbeck

  5. Balzac

    In California and elsewhere, the hot corner for building power plants is natural gas peaking plants – those that can be quickly turned up and down (rather than run at a constant level all year). Since the wind and solar are unreliable, more gas back-up is needed to keep the lights on.

    So when the greens point to solar as a shift away from fossil fuels….well they’re deceiving us. The solar is multiplying the gas.