'Not the greatest crisis' - Trump's EPA pick downplays climate threat

[webfact]

'Not the greatest crisis' - Trump's EPA pick downplays climate threat

By Valerie Volcovici

 

FILE PHOTO: Acting Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Andrew Wheeler speaks during an event hosted by U.S. President Donald Trump with workers on "Cutting the Red Tape, Unleashing Economic Freedom" in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, U.S., October 17, 2018. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump's new pick to run the Environmental Protection Agency told lawmakers on Wednesday he does not believe climate change is a major crisis, and would continue to undo Obama-era emission limits if confirmed.

 

Trump nominated EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler last week to run the agency permanently, seeking a strong advocate for his pro-fossil fuels agenda - a choice that cheered business interests and drawn scorn from environmentalists.

 

"I would not call it the greatest crisis," Wheeler said at his confirmation hearing when asked if he believed the increasingly urgent warnings from scientists about the threats from global warming.

 

Wheeler's confirmation is expected to sail through the Republican-controlled Senate despite Democratic opposition. A Washington insider with years of experience, he has been running the EPA since July when his predecessor Scott Pruitt resigned in a flurry of criticism over his use of resources and staff for personal matters.

 

Democratic lawmakers focused on Wheeler's record at EPA, his past lobbying work for energy companies, and his stance on global warming - casting him as a pro-business extremist not fit to run the nation's top environmental regulator.

 

Democrat Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, asked Wheeler his view of global warming, which scientists say is driven by fossil fuels consumption and is leading to sea level rise, and more frequent flooding, wildfires and extreme weather.

 

Wheeler said he believed global warming is an important issue that needs to be addressed, but that far-reaching federal regulation forcing deep emissions cuts was the wrong approach and more faith should be put in the hands of states and private enterprise.

 

"You are putting up a smokescreen to ensure there is an advancement of Donald Trump’s dirty policies," Markey said, in one of the hearing's most heated exchanges. "That’s why it is relevant that you are a former coal industry lobbyist."

 

A federal report written by 13 government agencies late last year said climate change will cost the U.S. economy hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century, damaging everything from human health to infrastructure and agricultural production.

 

Trump, who has repeatedly cast doubt on climate change and has indicated his intention to withdraw from a global pact to fight it, dismissed the report after its release, saying "I don't believe it".

 

Wheeler said he had been briefed on the assessment, but was waiting for further briefings from his staff before taking a public position on its findings.

 

RECORD OF ROLLBACKS

Wheeler defended his record at EPA, which has been largely defined by moves to undo or weaken Obama-era environmental regulations. He cast the agency's rollbacks as a way to reduce the regulatory burden on business while also protecting air and water quality for Americans.

 

Among his accomplishments, Wheeler last year finalised a proposal to replace Obama-era federal curbs on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants with a new rule placing much of that power in the hands of states.

 

He has also overseen the EPA's gutting of the justification for Obama-era mercury emissions limits, a proposal to reduce the number of waterways under federal protection, and efforts to lower targets for vehicle fuel efficiency.

 

Democrats pressed Wheeler on whether his EPA work was in any way linked to his previous lobbying on behalf of energy companies like underground coal giant Murray Energy, a vocal proponent of reduced environmental and safety regulation.

 

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, held up photos of Wheeler attending meetings between Murray's Chief Executive Robert Murray and Trump administration officials, and asked Wheeler for a full accounting of the number of such meetings he had arranged for the coal company.

 

Wheeler said he would provide a written response.

 

Industry representatives and Republican lawmakers have largely praised Wheeler for his deregulatory stance.

 

"He understands how the regulatory process works and the type of effort that is required to develop effective and legally defensible regulatory reforms," said Jeff Holmstead, a partner at industry-focused law firm Bracewell and a former EPA air administrator.

 

Environmental groups have taken a different view.

 

Activists briefly interrupted Wheeler's testimony on Wednesday shouting "Shut down Wheeler, not the EPA," and several were arrested after demonstrating outside the hearing room.

 

(Additional reporting by Humeyra Pamuk; Editing by Marguerita Choy and Paul Simao)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-01-17

[Tug]

Another words kick the can down the road this administration lacks the moral courage to address this crises

[TopDeadSenter]

 Well this is a breath of fresh air. So called climate change, and how to extract the maximum amount of money from populations to fix the pie-in-the-sky theory makes me sick to the back teeth. Unproven, disagreed on by many scientists, many "green" energies causing untold damage mining hazardous materials to make batteries and other accompanying hardware. It's all a total nonsense. Good to see Wheeler concurring. Fossil fuels will be and should be our primary fuel sources until a) climate change is proven and realistic plans are made to deal with it, or b) fossil fuels are finished. We should be fine for another few hundred years - time to develop realistic plans.

[YetAnother]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

U.S. President Donald Trump's new pick to run the Environmental Protection Agency told lawmakers on Wednesday he does not believe climate change is a major crisis,

sounds like none of the best people want to work for trump so we get the far-less-than-best

[oztaurus]

51 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

 Well this is a breath of fresh air. So called climate change, and how to extract the maximum amount of money from populations to fix the pie-in-the-sky theory makes me sick to the back teeth. Unproven, disagreed on by many scientists, many "green" energies causing untold damage mining hazardous materials to make batteries and other accompanying hardware. It's all a total nonsense. Good to see Wheeler concurring. Fossil fuels will be and should be our primary fuel sources until a) climate change is proven and realistic plans are made to deal with it, or b) fossil fuels are finished. We should be fine for another few hundred years - time to develop realistic plans.

Actually fossil fuels used to be the future, but that has changed now - renewables are already cheaper:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/12/03/plunging-prices-mean-building-new-renewable-energy-is-cheaper-than-running-existing-coal/#3ceb372331f3

https://www.sciencealert.com/solar-power-is-now-the-cheapest-energy-in-the-world

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/renewables-may-prove-cheaper-than-96-of-coal-plants-2030#gs.CShiOX1k

 

so even without the environment argument, a blinkered view on fossil fuels will hurt everyone's hip pocket.

[Lungstib]

Obviously time for a name change;  E.D.A.  Environmental destruction agency.

Recent reports of the massive loss of ice not only in the polar regions but from glaciers and the resulting rising sea levels are not scientific, they are actual visual accounts from affected citizens. But 'deny' has become the political norm these days. Our great grand-children will never forgive us this stupidity. 

[Cryingdick]

26 minutes ago, oztaurus said:

Actually fossil fuels used to be the future, but that has changed now - renewables are already cheaper:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/12/03/plunging-prices-mean-building-new-renewable-energy-is-cheaper-than-running-existing-coal/#3ceb372331f3

https://www.sciencealert.com/solar-power-is-now-the-cheapest-energy-in-the-world

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/renewables-may-prove-cheaper-than-96-of-coal-plants-2030#gs.CShiOX1k

 

so even without the environment argument, a blinkered view on fossil fuels will hurt everyone's hip pocket.

 

Fantastic news! If that news is true then industry will widely adapt it and the free market will be the force for change. No need for the new green deal.

[Cryingdick]

1 hour ago, TopDeadSenter said:

 Well this is a breath of fresh air. So called climate change, and how to extract the maximum amount of money from populations to fix the pie-in-the-sky theory makes me sick to the back teeth. Unproven, disagreed on by many scientists, many "green" energies causing untold damage mining hazardous materials to make batteries and other accompanying hardware. It's all a total nonsense. Good to see Wheeler concurring. Fossil fuels will be and should be our primary fuel sources until a) climate change is proven and realistic plans are made to deal with it, or b) fossil fuels are finished. We should be fine for another few hundred years - time to develop realistic plans.

 

We should all strive to be like Germany. They want to ban internal combustion vehicles, have banned nuclear power production in their country, and are pretty much entirely Russia's slave when it comes to energy.

 

Never mind they banned nuclear power after Fukushima and fail to recognize they just get that power from plants just across the border in places like France and The Netherlands.

 

They think that ten kilometers is going to save them if the wind blows the wrong way?

 

That being said there is progress being made but it isn't quite there yet. I have a not so small holding in Tesla so I do hope for the future of electric vehicles. Although it is a tad hypocritical that Tesla gets tax breaks for their cars when they actually do not pay any road tax through gasoline taxes. 

 

For those that are retired and think a carbon tax is a good thing, you would have to be taxed on your pension to make up for past damage done. you can't just shift this to younger generations now you have exploited the cheap fossil fuels and leave the young to pay who have to work and as such commute. 

 

If everybody is willing to sacrifice that's fine by me. How many will do so if the carbon tax was a straight 30% of your total monthly intake?

 

[TopDeadSenter]

1 hour ago, oztaurus said:

Actually fossil fuels used to be the future, but that has changed now - renewables are already cheaper:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/12/03/plunging-prices-mean-building-new-renewable-energy-is-cheaper-than-running-existing-coal/#3ceb372331f3

https://www.sciencealert.com/solar-power-is-now-the-cheapest-energy-in-the-world

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/renewables-may-prove-cheaper-than-96-of-coal-plants-2030#gs.CShiOX1k

 

so even without the environment argument, a blinkered view on fossil fuels will hurt everyone's hip pocket.

Solar power is brilliant, so long as you only need power during the day. Wind is an outright scam. I realize it is politically correct to harp on about the wonders of "green" electricity, but it is a fallacious stance. Please consider the true cost of these oh so fashionable sources of electricity before rushing to champion technologies you have no understanding of.

 

Here is a very interesting primer on wind power and how it is total BS.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/wind-turbines-are-neither-clean-nor-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/

[Boon Mee]

6 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Solar power is brilliant, so long as you only need power during the day. Wind is an outright scam. I realize it is politically correct to harp on about the wonders of "green" electricity, but it is a fallacious stance. Please consider the true cost of these oh so fashionable sources of electricity before rushing to champion technologies you have no understanding of.

 

Here is a very interesting primer on wind power and how it is total BS.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/wind-turbines-are-neither-clean-nor-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/

Kills massive amounts of birds too. 

 

[TopDeadSenter]

3 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Kills massive amounts of birds too. 

 

I would like to tie up every green energy proponent and force them to watch this on repeat. And then let them tell of how great and green renewable energy is.

 

 

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, oztaurus said:

Actually fossil fuels used to be the future, but that has changed now - renewables are already cheaper:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/12/03/plunging-prices-mean-building-new-renewable-energy-is-cheaper-than-running-existing-coal/#3ceb372331f3

https://www.sciencealert.com/solar-power-is-now-the-cheapest-energy-in-the-world

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/renewables-may-prove-cheaper-than-96-of-coal-plants-2030#gs.CShiOX1k

 

so even without the environment argument, a blinkered view on fossil fuels will hurt everyone's hip pocket.

When will a commercial passenger plane or cargo ship operate on "renewable" energy? Until that time fossil fuels will remain important. 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, Ahab said:

When will a commercial passenger plane or cargo ship operate on "renewable" energy? Until that time fossil fuels will remain important. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/03/11/united-airlines-is-flying-on-biofuels-heres-why-thats-a-really-big-deal/?utm_term=.565f24cb5bd3

[Tug]

Actually storage of the energy is the key and weaning off fossil fuel and the fuel lobby.if I could travel 1,000 miles on a charge that would be great but the batteries aren’t up to it yet the key is storage of the energy it’s out there for the harvesting 

[Becker]

2 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

 Well this is a breath of fresh air. So called climate change, and how to extract the maximum amount of money from populations to fix the pie-in-the-sky theory makes me sick to the back teeth. Unproven, disagreed on by many scientists, many "green" energies causing untold damage mining hazardous materials to make batteries and other accompanying hardware. It's all a total nonsense. Good to see Wheeler concurring. Fossil fuels will be and should be our primary fuel sources until a) climate change is proven and realistic plans are made to deal with it, or b) fossil fuels are finished. We should be fine for another few hundred years - time to develop realistic plans.

We should be fine for another few hundred years??? Wow, just when I thought you man-child supporters......never mind.

[Becker]

54 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Kills massive amounts of birds too. 

 

 

50 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

I would like to tie up every green energy proponent and force them to watch this on repeat. And then let them tell of how great and green renewable energy is.

 

 

Funny how the trumpets all of a sudden became very concerned about wildlife

[mcambl61]

2 hours ago, oztaurus said:

Actually fossil fuels used to be the future, but that has changed now - renewables are already cheaper:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/12/03/plunging-prices-mean-building-new-renewable-energy-is-cheaper-than-running-existing-coal/#3ceb372331f3

https://www.sciencealert.com/solar-power-is-now-the-cheapest-energy-in-the-world

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/renewables-may-prove-cheaper-than-96-of-coal-plants-2030#gs.CShiOX1k

 

so even without the environment argument, a blinkered view on fossil fuels will hurt everyone's hip pocket.

no, they are not cheaper and are much less efficient in addition, the lack of ability to respond to peak power demands.

this has to be measured in cost per Kw hour, then factor in the downtime of renewable sources and their maintenance costs.

That would be an honest assessment 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/04/23/if-solar-and-wind-are-so-cheap-why-are-they-making-electricity-more-expensive/

 

https://climatechangedispatch.com/368-papers-refute-ipcc-alarmist-dogma/amp/

https://climatism.blog/2018/09/26/father-of-the-2c-climate-target-admits-number-is-fabricated-two-degrees-is-not-a-magical-limit-its-clearly-a-political-goal/amp/

 

[roobaa01]

the climate change is an ideological fairy tale grown on reality lost minds of socialist dreamers like alexandria ocasio cortez. she wants her green deal for the us, meaning more socialism less freedom as everything would be placed under government control, zero carbon emission, industry abolished, population up for destitution. thereto, she would not know how to finance her socialist rubbish concept. ocasio cortez does even know how to express herself verbally, using statements like we (the dems) run the train-what did she mean ????

 

wbr

roobaa01

[bristolboy]

28 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

no, they are not cheaper and are much less efficient in addition, the lack of ability to respond to peak power demands.

this has to be measured in cost per Kw hour, then factor in the downtime of renewable sources and their maintenance costs.

That would be an honest assessment 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/04/23/if-solar-and-wind-are-so-cheap-why-are-they-making-electricity-more-expensive/

 

https://climatechangedispatch.com/368-papers-refute-ipcc-alarmist-dogma/amp/

https://climatism.blog/2018/09/26/father-of-the-2c-climate-target-admits-number-is-fabricated-two-degrees-is-not-a-magical-limit-its-clearly-a-political-goal/amp/

 

In fact, battery powered "peaker" plants are already supplanting natural gas peaker plants. That reflects both how dramatically the cost of solar and wind power has plummeted and the huge improvement in batter storage.

Clean energy is catching up to natural gas

"First, wind and solar costs fell so far, so fast that they are now undercutting the cost of new gas in a growing number of regions. And then batteries — which can “firm up” variable renewables, diminishing the need for natural gas’s flexibility — also started getting cheap faster than anyone expected. It happened so fast that, in certain limited circumstances, solar+storage or wind+storage is already cheaper than new natural gas plants and able to play all the same roles (and more)."

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/7/13/17551878/natural-gas-markets-renewable-energy

 

And this article was written before another major breakthrough in batter storage was announced: rechargeable zink-oxide batteries can now be built for less than $100 per kilowatt hour of storage capability. That $100 mark was the holy grail sought to make battery storage completely commercially viable.

NantEnergy Announces Largest Global Deployment of Novel Air Breathing Zinc Rechargeable Battery System and Breakthrough in Cost Barrier

"NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--NantEnergy today announced a breakthrough in its six-year mission to develop the world’s first scalable air breathing zinc rechargeable battery system at a manufacturing cost below $100 kWh and to operate this intelligent digitally controlled system on a global scale. This green rechargeable battery, an air-breathing cell, uses just zinc and air, integrated with digitally controlled intelligence. The energy system is monitored in real time in the cloud and has been successfully deployed in nine countries with more than 3,000 systems supporting 110 villages and 1,000 installations across cell tower sites."

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180926005265/en/NantEnergy-Announces-Largest-Global-Deployment-Novel Air-Breathing

[mtls2005]

Is this chap getting paid during the trump Shutdown?

 

I think that the EPA employees forced back to work without pay, to prepare Mr. Wheeler for his confirmation hearing are not.

 

Not much to administer I guess?

 

trump seems jazzed about EVs...

 

 

 

[Becker]

1 hour ago, roobaa01 said:

 ocasio cortez does even know how to express herself verbally, using statements like we (the dems) run the train-what did she mean ????

I often ask myself the same question when reading your posts.

 

PS. Here's a fun fact for you; The p-grabber in the WH that you support couldn't string together a coherent sentence even if you pinched his aching bone spurs.

Edited January 17, 2019 by Becker

[Krataiboy]

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

 Well this is a breath of fresh air. So called climate change, and how to extract the maximum amount of money from populations to fix the pie-in-the-sky theory makes me sick to the back teeth. Unproven, disagreed on by many scientists, many "green" energies causing untold damage mining hazardous materials to make batteries and other accompanying hardware. It's all a total nonsense. Good to see Wheeler concurring. Fossil fuels will be and should be our primary fuel sources until a) climate change is proven and realistic plans are made to deal with it, or b) fossil fuels are finished. We should be fine for another few hundred years - time to develop realistic plans.

You must be choking, squire. . .  as are most Bangkokians right now, not to mention the millions around the world suffering death and disease resulting from the use of fossil fuels.

Each year 2 million people worldwide die prematurely from the poisonous gases that make up smog, according to the World Health Organisation. Only last year, a Greenpeace survey revealed fourteen Thai provinces had air pollution well above WHO-recommended limits.

 

Whether or not the use the burning of fossil fuels is a major cause of climate change may be open to argument. However, the horrendous health consequences to human populations - particularly across developing nations such as Thailand - is indisputable.

 

We urgently need action, not excuses for inaction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[joecoolfrog]

5 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

 Well this is a breath of fresh air. So called climate change, and how to extract the maximum amount of money from populations to fix the pie-in-the-sky theory makes me sick to the back teeth. Unproven, disagreed on by many scientists, many "green" energies causing untold damage mining hazardous materials to make batteries and other accompanying hardware. It's all a total nonsense. Good to see Wheeler concurring. Fossil fuels will be and should be our primary fuel sources until a) climate change is proven and realistic plans are made to deal with it, or b) fossil fuels are finished. We should be fine for another few hundred years - time to develop realistic plans.

Pathetic nonsense !

[farcanell]

6 hours ago, webfact said:

more faith should be put in the hands of states and private enterprise.

Wow..... just wow

 

local, state,  national and international standards exist simply because actors cannot be trusted to act responsibly, as is proven over and over and over again.

 

wow.

[bristolboy]

9 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Wow..... just wow

 

local, state,  national and international standards exist simply because actors cannot be trusted to act responsibly, as is proven over and over and over again.

 

wow.

Even Milton Friedman, the patron economist-saint of capitalism, conceded that government intervention was necessary to protect the environment.

[DM07]

I just read some of the comments of the climate change- deniers on here...and every time I do that, my IQ drops by  massive  points!

Afterwards, I have to hit my head against the wall and have a few pints, until I am back to normal!

Jeeeezus, guys!

How deep down the rabbit hole, you have to go, to deny wind-energy, because every year some birds die!

At the same time, you are completely unfazed by the sinking of islands, the melting of glaciers and the vanishing of the polar icecaps eg DEATH FOR ALL OF US!

If there were a god, he should consider starting over, without mankind and it's greatest thinkers...

Edited January 17, 2019 by DM07

[Berkshire]

33 minutes ago, DM07 said:

I just read some of the comments of the climate change- deniers on here...and every time I do that, my IQ drops by  massive  points!

Afterwards, I have to hit my head against the wall and have a few pints, until I am back to normal!

Jeeeezus, guys!

How deep down the rabbit hole, you have to go, to deny wind-energy, because every year some birds die!

At the same time, you are completely unfazed by the sinking of islands, the melting of glaciers and the vanishing of the polar icecaps eg DEATH FOR ALL OF US!

If there were a god, he should consider starting over, without mankind and it's greatest thinkers...

I get you.  I certainly understand how those in the fossil fuel industry--especially coal--would be deniers.  Their pocketbook and livelihood depends on it.  So if you're a coal baron with millions tied-up in coal and most of the world turning away, then of course you won't feel any guilt about commissioning some fake scientific report which rejects climate change.  And certain politicians being paid by coal lobbyists, they're fine rejecting science.  They get paid to be ignorant. 

 

But some of these guys on TV are deniers simply because Trump says so.  How stupid is that?     

[DM07]

32 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

I get you.  I certainly understand how those in the fossil fuel industry--especially coal--would be deniers.  Their pocketbook and livelihood depends on it.  So if you're a coal baron with millions tied-up in coal and most of the world turning away, then of course you won't feel any guilt about commissioning some fake scientific report which rejects climate change.  And certain politicians being paid by coal lobbyists, they're fine rejecting science.  They get paid to be ignorant. 

 

But some of these guys on TV are deniers simply because Trump says so.  How stupid is that?     

Even more so: if you are "just" a Trump- supporter...what exactly do you have to loose, if you try to make the air not choking you to death or tuna not eat plastic?

I don't get it!

Coal is OVER, as anyone who can read, can see!

Even Trumps idiotic "clean coal"- idiocy didn't put any more coal miners back to work and the renewable energy -industry creates jobs upon jobs upon jobs!

Even IF it was an elaborate hoax by Leonardo Di Caprio and some cunning (well...) ten thousand climate- scientists ...what is the worst thing, that could happen?

Sushi will not consist of 80% plastic and the air doesn't burn in your lunges, when you breath it!

It's not that hard!

[Ahab]

7 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/03/11/united-airlines-is-flying-on-biofuels-heres-why-thats-a-really-big-deal/?utm_term=.565f24cb5bd3

It is still 70% jet fuel. The US Navy tried this during President Obama's term for carrier based aircraft. The fuel cost 8 to ten times the cost of regular jet fuel. Not exactly a panacea. 

[Nyezhov]

Im not giving up my lifestyle so some elitist bureaucrats, activists, snake oil salesmen and ignorant millennial busybodies can gin up some purported existential crisis and get more control over my life, especially when they ignore settled science in favour of dictatorial solutions.

 

Even assuming arguendo that it matters, when Chinas CO2 drop, give me a holler. If you are an American and are so worried about Global warming, move to Cali or Washington state and pay your carbon taxes. Or permit nuclear plants faster to generate some of the clean electric you will need to run your clean cars. And dont go running to Conferences all over the place on someone elses dime emitting more pollutants than I can do in a lifetime on a steady diet of beans. Until yall get that straightened out, pass me a Burger and a Ford V-8.