California Senator Boxer, Connecticut Senator Lieberman, Nevada Senate Leader Reid, Texas Senator Hutchison, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi intend to drive Climate Change Legislation (Cap & Trade Bills), through Congress early in January 2009.
NOAA (U.S. Department of
Commerce), lists more than sixty current and ongoing weather modification
programs being implemented across the
Artificial weather modification can impact all of us by chemically polluting our water supplies, changing agricultural crop production cycles and micro-climates, reducing crop production, and water availability. Since most experimental weather modification programs use chemicals released into the atmosphere the public could be subjected to increasingly toxic or unknown substances that could adversely impact agricultural crops, pollute drinking water supplies, and cause declining tree health.
If the weather is changed in one state, region or county it changes local micro-climates needed for agricultural crop production. These changes can cause dramatic shifts in weather conditions in other locations both nearby and thousands of miles away. And who is going to decide the type of weather modification experimentation and who will benefit or suffer from the adverse consequences of these programs? Who will be responsible for studying the synergistic effects of these programs or pay for unintended disasters created by this experimentation? If these programs change growing seasons and interrupt the pollination process crop losses could be substantial.
The following bills were slated to be passed by the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives in 2008: (Most of these bills will be reintroduced with new bill numbers in 2009.)
U.S. Senate Bill 1807 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-1807
U.S. Senate Bill 2191 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2191
U.S. Senate Bill 3036 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-3036
U.S. House Bill 3445 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-3445
“BUYING & SELLING THE RIGHT TO POLLUTE”
THE CAP & TRADE SCAM
Oceans, Forests & Taxpayers - Victims of “Offsets” & Money Market Shell Games
By Rosalind Peterson
October 8, 2008
According to an extensive article in the San Francisco Chronicle dated September 7, 2008, “…Early buyers of California forest offsets have included high-profile politicians and businesses, such as Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and the Pacific Gas & Electric Company…” Why did they purchase these offsets? “…Governor Schwarzenegger and Speaker Pelosi bought relatively small amounts in 2007, to offset emissions from some of their air travel. Other buyers have included carbon trading firms such as Natsource and CantorCO2e, a division of the financial services firm Cantor Fitzgerald…”
Shouldn’t Speaker Pelosi and Governor Schwarzenegger be introducing legislation to make jet fuel emissions less polluting and to stop jets from flying at altitudes where their persistent jet contrails turn into man-made clouds that, according to NASA studies, exacerbate global warming and climate change? (NASA stated in an October 2005, newsletter based on their research studies, that increasingly persistent jet contrails turn into man-made clouds that are ”…trapping warmth in the atmosphere and exacerbating global warming…” NASA goes on to state that “…any change in global cloud cover may contribute to long-term changes in Earth’s climate. Contrails, especially persistent contrails, represent a human-caused increase in the Earth’s cloudiness, and are likely to be affecting climate and ultimately our natural resources…”)
Where is the legislation from
California Governor Schwarzenegger, a true “Cap & Trade” promoter, and
Speaker Pelosi designed to protect our oceans and marine life from artificial
iron fertilization proposed by
In addition, logging is to start
The San Francisco Chronicle
stated that Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) is: “…The biggest
buyer so far (of offsets)…PG&E made its purchase as part of its
ClimateSmart program, in which homeowners and businesses can choose to add a
small fee to their monthly utility bill to counterbalance emissions from their
gas and electricity usage…Both the price and the demand for forest offsets
could grow as the United States takes steps to combat climate change.
Our elected officials are so in love with the sing-song words “cap and trade” that they are echoing this catchy phrase across the country. Even our presidential candidates use the phrase which is used without a clear definition. “We will cap emissions” they say, at some high level and then allow anyone who wants to pollute above that level to purchase pollution credits. And our elected officials will pass legislation that will cost the taxpayer money by charging more for goods and services to fund allowing polluters to pollute more.
A quick read of Senator Boxer or Lieberman’s Climate Security Acts of 2007, detail in depth how the banks will be enriched, along with the taxpayer fleecing), to pay to fund a private corporation called the Climate Change Credit Corporation which will establish emission allowances and sell emission credits to polluters. According to this Act “…the Corporation shall not be considered to be an agency or establishment of the Federal Government…” It is run by an easily corrupted Carbon Market Efficiency Board which will not have public or congressional oversight. This “bait and switch” game is not a complicated scheme…however, its environmental consequences are enormous.
This Corporate Board will
determine emissions allowances by polluting corporations or other entities and
then require them to purchase offsets if they exceed these pollution
levels. These offsets can be purchased
The “purpose” of this subtitle (2601), is to “…establish a Carbon Market Efficiency Board to ensure the implementation and maintenance of a stable, functioning, and efficient market in emission allowances...” The real goal of this bill is to establish an efficient money market scheme to make sure that polluters have all of the emission allowances and credits they need in order to keep polluting at current or higher levels.
The “bait”, in this “Bait & Switch” scheme, is that air pollution that is causing climate change and global warming is being reduced and that the profits from selling offsets may or may not be given to solar and other clean energy development. The “switch” is that emission offsets and allowances will be sold to polluters allowing them to pollute more while enriching venture capitalists and corporations selling offsets. The “patsy” in the scheme is the American taxpayer and the taxes they will pay at every level.
The “end result” is that
corporations will pollute more…our oceans will be iron fertilized everywhere
producing harmful algae blooms for private profit to sell pollution allowances
to polluters. It makes perfect sense
only to those who would benefit from these money market schemes.
WARNING…The FDA is not protecting the public and it is time that we protect ourselves from these toxic chemical experiments on our children from toxic baby bottles.
1) New York Times September 6, 2008 Canned Goods, Water Bottles & Baby Bottle Chemical Warning: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/06/opinion/06sat4.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print
That Plastic Baby Bottle & Liners for Canned Goods “What do you do when one arm of
the government says everything is O.K. and another tells you to watch out? That
is what is happening with bisphenol-A —
a chemical used in many plastics and epoxy resins now found in baby bottles and
liners for canned goods. The answer is a truism in every family rulebook — when
in doubt, especially when it comes to children, err on the side of caution.
That means it is a good idea to keep the young away from bisphenol-A, or
BPA…Then this week, the National
Toxicology Program, the federal agency for toxicological research, reported
that their research shows “some concern” about the effects of BPA on the brain
development and behavior of fetuses and young children. A new study by the
San Francisco Chronicle September 7, 2008 –
Francisco Chronicle September 7, 2008 –
Francisco Chronicle September 7, 2008 –
San Francisco Chronicle September 7, 2008 –
The Press Democrat – Mendocino County, California Logging to Resume in Jackson State Demonstration Forest - September 4, 2008 - California’s largest state forest.
9) http://www.climos.com/about.html CLIMOS 2008
Iron Fertilization of our Oceans – Will produce artificial algae blooms.
15) September 5, 2008 AP New Writer Burke California Sequoia Trees – Climate Change
“Permit to Pollute” September 12, 2008 Guardian.co.uk (Emission Credits – Cap & Trade Schemes)
17) http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment September 12, 2008 Guardian.co.uk by David Adam
“…A flagship European scheme designed to
fight global warming is set to hand hundreds of millions of pounds to some of
18) “A Permit to Print Money” by Oliver Tickell September 12, 2008: “…Far from incentivising emissions cuts, the EU's carbon trading scheme provides a grotesque subsidy for the biggest polluters…” http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/12/carbonemissions.climatechangehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/12/carbonemissions.climatechange
“…There is a "magical
logic" in the way hundreds of billions of pounds' worth of carbon
allowances are given away to polluting companies…That company…was given twice
as many allowances – tradable pollution permits created by the EU's Emission
Trading System (EUETS)
– as it actually needs to cover its own emissions. The remainder it will sell
“…But in the looking-glass world
of the EUETS, the "polluters pays" principle is replaced by its
mirror image – the "polluters get paid" principle…But the biggest
winners of all are the biggest polluters, the power companies, which benefit to
the tune of €30bn per year. According to energy regulator Ofgem, the
20) http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/10/emissionstrading.utilities August 10, 2008
“…Energy companies are set to scoop even bigger windfall profits from emissions trading than originally predicted…Hard-pressed consumers could end up bankrolling most of this windfall through higher fuel bills…The European trading scheme was introduced to reduce industry's carbon emissions Companies are given free permits giving them the right to emit a fixed amount of carbon. They have to buy additional permits on the carbon markets to pollute more, or pay a penalty…” or they can sell their credits for a profit.
The United States Senate is set to pass Senators Lieberman and Boxer Climate Security Act (2191 or 3036), that would take the United States down this same path giving taxpayers one more financial market headache.
21) New York Times September 15, 2008 Another Cap & Trade Market Scheme Benefits Polluters.
"...The program is due to get off the ground in nine days, but already there are worries that it may fail to reduce pollution substantially in the Northeast, undermining a concept that is being watched carefully by the rest of the country, by Congress and by European regulators...The states will set their own limits, with each issuing tradable permits, or allowances, for carbon pollution. On Sept. 25, utilities will start bidding at auction for allowances, which they can later sell...He also noted that the market was also “not going to produce a lot of emission reductions” as long as the supply of allowances outstrips utilities’ need...A dirtier plant can buy additional allowances in the secondary market, but it may be expensive — or it can just find a way to cut its pollution. Conversely, a cleaner utility can sell its unneeded allowances...The carbon market follows a three-year-old European experiment, the first of its kind, that provoked widespread criticism, both because it provided windfall profits for industry and because it did little to control heat-trapping emissions..."
22) The Hill Newspaper reported on Wednesday, October 8, 2008, that a new 461 page “Cap & Trade” bill had been unveiled by two House Democrats: House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell and Energy & Air Quality Subcommittee Chairman Rick Boucher. According to the article by Jim Snyder: “…Part of the impetus for the release of the bills seems to be to head off a separate effort at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to cut emissions through federal regulation, an option made available last year when the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA had the authority, under the Clean Water Act, to address global warming…” All of us should work to defeat this bill.
BELSON Drivers who commute
by car between New York and New Jersey can assuage their guilt by buying
credits from the Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey to offset their vehicles’ carbon
emissions. At a board meeting
on Thursday, the Port Authority announced that it had approved a measure to pay
five companies a total of $2.5 million to set up a carbon offset program for
the agency. A Web site where
drivers and airline passengers can buy credits to offset carbon emissions they
be activated in early 2009. Money
from the carbon-offset credits is typically used to plant trees, build
windmills, install solar panels and take other measures that may help reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. The
announcement came six
months after the agency said it would establish an offset program, the
first of its kind in the
The program is part of the Port Authority’s plan to become carbon neutral by 2010. The agency also wants to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions it generates by 80 percent by 2050. “We’re deeply committed to being in the national forefront in developing environmentally sustainable practices at our airports, seaports, tunnels and bridges,” Anthony R. Coscia, the chairman of the Port Authority, said in a statement. To meets its carbon emission targets, the Port Authority will make Stewart International Airport in Orange County, N.Y., a “carbon-negative” airport, install energy-efficient L.E.D. lighting at the Holland Tunnel and the George Washington Bridge, build a geothermal-powered building at Kennedy International Airport and spend $60 million to buy and preserve environmentally sensitive land for public use.” End
September 26, 2008
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
“The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, an effort by 10 Northeastern states to combat climate change, held its first auction of pollution rights on Thursday.
The program caps the amount of carbon dioxide that power plants can emit, forcing utilities to buy allowances to pollute. Not all utilities participated in the auction. The prices and number of allowances sold will not be known until Monday.
Critics have charged the program
will have little benefit in the near term, because the emissions cap is too
Seven Western states and four Canadian provinces have outlined a global warming plan. Participants on both coasts hope to prod Congress into passing a national trading system.”