Today’s post is at Stream: Obama Warns: Global Warming Deniers Now Face the Disapproval of … Business Leaders!
In his final State of the Union speech, President Obama said, “If anybody still wants to dispute the science around [global warming], have at it. You’ll be debating…business leaders.” Now that’s a threat. Who wants to debate business leaders on subjects on which they are largely ignorant? It can only lead to heartburn.
Imagine, for instance, debating business leader Tom Steyer, a billionaire (he made a lot of his money on coal) and environmental activist who supports Mr Obama’s “battle” to stop “climate change”. This is, of course, impossible. No power on earth can stop the climate from changing. But since Mr Obama and business leader Steyer think they can do the impossible, by making “decisive and irrevocable” moves, you can see that a debate with them on the topic would go nowhere.
Steyer keenly believes, or at least publicly claims, that the world is doomed by global warming, and that the only hope for salvation is for the government to subsidize—the proper euphemism is “invest in”—what he and Mr Obama call “clean” energy, businesses in which Steyer has an interest. For instance, he’s one of the “managers” of Kilowatt Financial, “a green energy company that finances solar and energy efficiency projects.”
“Clean” energy makes for dirty politics. Maybe this is why Steyer is throwing a lot of money at the “non-profit” group NextGen Climate, a group which released the report “Threat Multiplier: Climate Change & the State of Our Union” in time for Mr Obama’s speech.
The report is a marvel of the pseudo-science common in political discussions of climatology. It says, “As temperatures rise due to climate change, productivity in the workforce will decline.” Which is why nobody works in the summer, right? And why, say, Northern Alaska is teeming with industrial action.
One point I’d like to emphasize. Steyer is demanding the entire country move to 50% (or more?) “clean” energy by 2030, or 2050, or whatever. Since wind and solar are so unreliable, expensive, and small, and frequently must be paired with ordinary fossil fuel plants, have you any idea what the cost would be to covert the entire country?
Hundreds of billions, at rough guess. Maybe a trillion. And who would be one of the recipients of this wealth? Of course, these folks don’t think they’d get all that they asked for. The negotiating technique is to ask for more than you know you can get: anchor and adjust. But even a paltry one percent of a trillion is enough to keep you in dry-roasted peanuts for the rest of your life.
Is it just possible that the love of money is involved? Show of hands: how many think Mr Obama will, after his retirement, join the board of at least one “clean” energy company? One…two…?