Monday, December 11, 2023

Leftist authoritarianism again

Senior climate experts are calling for an overhaul of the structure and powers of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in despair at the slow pace of climate action.

Five lead authors of IPCC reports told the Guardian that scientists should be given the right to make policy prescriptions and, potentially, to oversee their implementation by the 195 states signed up to the UN framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC).

Their call came after it emerged that the United Arab Emirates had been planning to use its position as Cop28 host to strike oil and gas deals .

Sonia Seneviratne, an IPCC vice-chair and coordinating lead author since 2012, said: “At some point we need to say that if you want to achieve this aim set by policymakers then certain policies need to be implemented.

“As climate change becomes worse and worse, it is becoming more difficult to be policy relevant without being prescriptive.”

Scientists should be able to call for fossil fuel cuts and phaseouts, she said. The discrepancy between IPCC science and action on the ground was “very difficult for us to understand as scientists because it doesn’t seem to make any sense”.

Gert-Jan Nabuurs, a coordinating lead author on three IPCC reports, said: “The IPCC’s critical, independent and guiding roles seem to be less and less evident. As they decline, countries seem to be exerting a larger and larger influence.”

The problem for authors was that “we can’t be policy prescriptive, so we can’t make hard statements on what should be done”, he said.

Nabuurs questioned the value of continuing to produce assessment reports when “we already know that in five to six years’ time the message is not going to be very different, the problem will still be there, emissions will still be going up, there will be more evidence of impacts and less time to try to stay under 2C [of heating above pre-industrial levels]”.

Greenhouse gas emissions are on track to rise by 9% by 2030, despite years of warnings from scientists that climate tipping points may be near. Emissions would need to fall by 43% by the decade’s end to meet the Paris climate agreement goal of capping global heating at 1.5C.

Julia Steinberger, a coordinating lead author on climate mitigation pathways on the IPCC’s most recent, sixth assessment report, known as AR6, said: “Right now, not only is the IPCC prevented from making strong, clear, commonsense statements – like the need to urgently move away from fossil fuel use and investment – but many scientists have personally taken being ‘non policy prescriptive’ to be part of their communication in general, not just the IPCC’s. This self-silencing is counterproductive, in my opinion.”


California’s Electric Truck Mandate

The California GREEN movement, at any cost, is progressing at warp speed.

Earlier this year, California passed regulations that would turn the trucking industry upside down. Zero emission mandates would disrupt the industry, raise shipping costs, and put trucking companies out of business. A group including 19 states and several trucking organizations recently filed suit to block the California regulation.

A little background on the EV Truck mandate: California’s Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) Regulation goes into effect on January 1, 2024. The ACF requires that truck operators buy only Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) trucks for medium-duty and heavy-duty trucking operations as early as January 2024. The ACF also requires that trucking companies transition their fleets to 100 percent ZEV trucks by 2035 to 2042, depending upon class of truck.

This EV truck mandate lacks conversations about the many conundrums associated with this mandate, i.e., the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about:

For those huge EV truck batteries there is virtually non-existing transparency of the environmental degradation and the human rights abuses occurring in developing countries with yellow, brown, and black skinned people. Both human rights abuses and environmental degradation are directly connected to the mining for the exotic minerals and metals that are required to manufacture those EV batteries. The children used to produce the lithium for an EV battery is appalling.

California has almost 400,000 miles of roadways used by the State’s 31 million vehicles. Those roadways are heavily dependent on road taxes from fuels that contribute more than $8.8 billion annually, the same gas tax revenues that also funds many environmental programs. That $8.8 billion revenue source will diminish in the decades ahead as EV’s begin to replace internal combustion engine vehicles.

The heavier EV trucks will put more wear and tear on the California roadways. How will the State replace $8.8 billion from fuel taxes to maintain the California roadways?

California is the 4th largest economy in the world and has three of the largest shipping ports in America—No. 1 in Los Angeles, No. 2 in Long Beach, and No. 7 in Oakland. Ships arriving and departing from the ports up and down the coast from San Diego to San Francisco.

Many truckers are individual operators that may just stop coming to California! Those trucks that access three of the largest shipping ports in America move a lot of products for the entire country.

Trucker’s travel all over the nation, thus heavy EV truck charging stations sites would need to be built all over the nation to keep those trucks moving.

EV trucks are only for those in wealthy countries as Nearly Half the World Lives on Less than $5.50 a Day, as billions still struggle to meet basic needs. They may never be able to enjoy the materialistic living styles of those in wealthier countries.

Electric trucks suffer major disadvantages when compared to diesel trucks: Diesel trucks can travel about 1,200 miles after filling the tank in 15 minutes. The range of electric trucks is about 150-330 miles, and recharging may take hours, even on a high-speed charger.

EV truck cabs cost two-to-three times as much as diesel cabs, an incremental cost of as much as $300,000 per truck.

EV cabs also weigh about 10,000 pounds more than comparable diesel versions.

China emits more greenhouse gases in a day than California trucks emit in a year.

The California GREEN movement continues to be a National Security risk for America as 4th largest economy in the world is already importing most of its crude oil demands from foreign countries, to support the States’ 9 International airports, 41 Military airports, and 3 of the largest shipping ports in America, and is now mandating that the trucks that move many of the products to Americans be electric!


There's Just One Problem With That $7.5 Billion Congress Spent for EV Chargers

President Biden wants at least 50 percent of new vehicle sales by 2030 to be electric, but doing so requires significant investment in the infrastructure required to make that happen. To this end, Congress in 2021 spent $7.5 billion to invest in EV charging stations across the country through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

There’s just one problem, however. After two years, Biden's goal of "building a national network of 500,000 electric vehicle chargers along America’s highways and in our communities," has gone nowhere, as not a single charger has been installed.

States and the charger industry blame the delays mostly on the labyrinth of new contracting and performance requirements they have to navigate to receive federal funds. While federal officials have authorized more than $2 billion of the funds to be sent to states, fewer than half of states have even started to take bids from contractors to build the chargers — let alone begin construction.

Consumer demand for electric vehicles is rising in the United States, necessitating six times as many chargers on its roads by the end of the decade, according to federal estimates. But not a single charger funded by the bipartisan infrastructure law has come online and odds are they will not be able to start powering Americans’ vehicles until at least 2024.

Getting chargers up and running across the country is essential to reaching President Joe Biden’s goal of having half the vehicles sold in the United States be electric by the end of the decade — a key cog of his climate agenda. Americans consistently say the lack of charging infrastructure is one of the top reasons they won’t buy an electric car. (Politico)

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates the U.S. will need about 1.2 million public chargers by 2030 to meet demand. According to the Energy Department, there are only about 180,000 chargers today.

An unnamed Biden official said the slow rollout is not surprising given the administration's desire to build a “convenient, affordable, reliable, made-in-America equitable network.”

“Anybody can throw a charger in the ground — that’s not that hard, it doesn’t take that long,” the official told Politico. “Building a network is different.”

GOP senators reacted to the news, blasting Biden's green agenda.


British PM suffers large rebellion against the Zero Emission Vehicle Mandate

In a vote late on Monday night, 38 MPs voted against the legislation bringing in the Government’s Zero Emission Vehicle Mandate. The legislation enforces an 80% target for electric vehicles as a percentage of new car sales by 2030. With 28 Conservative MPs (including tellers) voting against, it is the biggest Tory revolt of Rishi Sunak’s premiership, surpassing the total that voted against the Government on the Windsor Framework.

The rebellion comes after the Net Zero Scrutiny Group wrote to the Prime Minister on Saturday saying: “If the cost of buying and running an EV will become cheaper than petrol and diesel cars, mandating them with this law is unnecessary. This law is anti-consumer, anti-choice and anti-motorist, and will only leave the public poorer. Car-ownership could once again be restricted to the privileged few.”

The size of the rebellion is significant because it was enough to overturn the Tories’ Commons majority, meaning Sunak knows he is now more vulnerable in parliament. Greg Smith, chair of Conservative Way Forward and a member of the Net Zero Scrutiny Group, said: “We reached the magic number — enough to wipe out the government’s working majority if Labour hadn’t supported them.”

Craig Mackinlay MP, chairman of the Net Zero Scrutiny Group, said:

“We all heard the Prime Minister pledge a more proportionate and pragmatic approach to Net Zero, but this pledge has not been met with action. I am disappointed that this legislation has been forced through using a statutory instrument – avoiding the kind of scrutiny that Rishi himself called for.”

“Nevertheless, I am pleased that so many of my colleagues chose to rebel on this important issue. We will not stop our campaign against draconian Net Zero legislation and will continue to promote a better way that protects people’s freedoms and does not leave them poorer.”

Andrea Jenkyns MP, who is a Board member of Net Zero Watch, said in a video to her supporters:

“To me, it’s actions not words. Those MPs who say that they want to stop Net Zero – which is certainly affecting constituents in their pockets – should have voted against this measure this evening.”

Harry Wilkinson, Net Zero Watch Head of Policy, said:

“This is a very significant vote which shows the strength of feeling on the backbenches. Conservative members are clearly deeply sceptical about the whole Net Zero agenda but they don’t have a Government which reflects those views. I welcome Rishi’s change of tone on Net Zero but that needs to be followed with a change of policy – he needs to stand up to the civil servants who keep pushing through draconian Net Zero measures.”




No comments: