The New York Times took some shine off President Barack Obama’s green energy pronouncements made in Tuesday’s State of the Union address. The newspaper stated Wednesday that much of the energy successes under the Obama administration came from oil companies and the private market.
What does a 5,544-page treaty touted by its supporters as promoting free trade among 12 Pacific Rim nations have to do with efforts by global elites to impose restrictions on the use of abundant and affordable energy? The answer is far more than the backers of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) want you to know.
Obligating the United States to slash its fossil fuel use, and send billions of taxpayer dollars annually to dictators, bureaucrats and crony industrialists in poor countries would be disastrous. Thank goodness it did not happen. But we are not out of the woods yet.
Despite a round of telephone diplomacy between the White House, Chinese President Xi and Indian Prime Minister Modi, China and India appear prepared to stand pat. They expect Obama's eagerness to claim a climate agreement as part of his legacy will lead him to fold on issues of substantive U.S. interest. That seems a strong bet.
With two days left, the UN is closer than ever before to creating a successor treaty/agreement to the Kyoto protocol. They also are poised to achieve their goal of bringing the U.S. into the UN climate regime. However, even at this late hour, substantial divisions remain. Brace for drama.
Week one of COP 21, the UN climate conference in Paris, concluded with the adoption of a draft “outcome.”
Obama gets the hook, CFACT makes a splash.
COP 21 could give President Obama the final tools to transform America into a third world economy.
Climate funding is a major sticking point at the UN climate talks in Paris. An Obama Administration official would not rule out shutting down the government over the UN "Green Climate Fund." If climate funding is not made part of a binding treaty, future U.S. Administrations will be free to cut off the funds at any time.
Developing nations are only in the UN climate pact for the cash. What if there is none?
Assuming the increasingly dubious position that the UN's climate models have some validity, should we truly hamstring America's prosperity and competitive position to make a meaningless one hundredth degree reduction in world temperature?
After years of deliberate delays President Obama rejected the Keystone XL pipeline today. This is a victory for radical environmentalists and those who wish America ill. It is a punch in the face to everyone else.
Will President Obama subject America to a UN climate court? He will if he signs onto one of the latest UN draft texts prepared in the run-up to the big UN summit in Paris.
Catholics need to learn the true nature of the radicals advising the Vatican on global warming.
President Obama’s Alaskan climate grandstanding was a flop on its two most vital points.