Air Travel Chickenhawks (Guest Post)

Loading

The EPA now has a plan to cut the planet-threatening phenomena known as airplane emissions (H/T Stephen Kruiser):

The Obama administration is set to announce that it will require new rules to cut emissions from airplanes, expanding a quest to tackle climate change that has included a string of significant regulations on cars, trucks and power plants.
The E.P.A.’s finding would lay the groundwork for the United States to adopt the emissions standard being negotiated by the International Civil Aviation Organization. That group aims by next year to set new emissions standards for airlines, which have said that national rules would do little to curb emissions, given the industry’s global reach.

“Aircraft are the largest remaining unregulated source of greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector and can only be regulated by the federal government,” said William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. “This presents President Obama with a tremendous opportunity to demonstrate leadership not only domestically but, indeed, around the world.”

Image appears via The Peoples Cube 

“Leadership”. That’s an interesting term to use for someone who regularly runs a carbon footprint that most Americans would take years to rack up. Speaking of leadership, last year’s Climate Conference in Peru set records for its carbon footprint:

The current UN climate talks will be the first to neutralise all the greenhouse gas pollution they generate, offset by host country Peru’s protection of forest reserves, organisers say. The bad news: the Lima conference is expected to have the biggest carbon footprint of any UN climate meeting measured to date.
At more than 50,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide, the negotiations’ burden on global warming will be about one and a half times the norm, said Jorge Alvarez, project coordinator for the UN Development Programme.

The venue is one big reason. It had to be built.

Eleven football fields of temporary structures arose for the 13-day negotiations from what three months ago was an empty field behind Peru’s army’s headquarters. Concrete was laid, plumbing installed, components flown in from as far as France and Brazil.

To use the old phrase, “I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people who tell me it’s a crisis act like it’s a crisis.” I understand the value of meeting face to face, but if these clowns were serious about how serious a problem Climate Change is shouldn’t they be leading the way in setting an example for us all to follow?
Or maybe it’s just another example of the radical left’s notion that there is one set of rules for them, and another for the commoners. But you can add this to the list of questions you can ask a Global Warm Monger if you want to quickly end a conversation.

Cross posted from Brother Bob’s Blog

Follow Brother Bob on Twitter and Facebook

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
11 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The only “Green House” gas we need to eliminate is from the White House.

When every prediction and model proves itself wrong, how does anyone in their right mind maintain a belief in AGW.

Oh… we’re talking about liberals. And Lindsey Graham.

The US Navy has been onboard AGW climate change for 15 years. I guess that must mean that they are all commies

@john: No, john, just not willing to open their minds. I, too, was convinced of AGW and quite worried about it. Until, that is, the East Algia email scandal. After that revelation, more people seemed willing to present more information (or perhaps it was then distributed more widely) and the true nature of AGW was revealed..

However, the bottom line is that there is AMPLE evidence that warming is not currently happening, that climate change is cyclic, that the models and predictions of you alarmists (and sycophants) are consistently wrong and that it is one huge, wealth redistribution (some of it being redistributed to private individuals) scam.

One way to cut airplane pollution is to set a maximum miles politicians can fly on non-commercial planes for their personal vacations or junkets. The would ESPECIALLY apply to the president.

@Smorgasbord:

Gee, could this be the end of Moochall’s very expensive habit of taking a separate jet? Oh, wait, that’s the ruling class. NM.

Maybe the Obama EPA will order the airliner industry to replace all those fuel guzzling jet engines with new “hybrid” versions (which don’t exist). Or maybe they will order exhaust filters be installed on the exhaust sections of the engines. Force the companies to install governors to limit the maximum speed of the turbofans. Perhaps they will make them switch from jet fuel to (too fast burning) E80 and we can watch the increased jet engine failure rate due to the loss of lubrication that jet fuel provides/

What’s next for the military? Will the Obama order the military to remove afterburners from fighter aircraft?

#6
#6
It’s not just the trips obama and michelle take, it’s the large group of people they take with them. Everywhere they go, they are rude and demanding to the help. They are lousy ambassadors for America. I just realize after I wrote the last sentence, that this could be one reason why some countries don’t like America as much as they used to.

I don’t mind obama and michelle taking as many trips oversees as they do. It’s them coming back that bothers me.

Im sure the EPA dosnt get around on flying carpets or ride around on giant prehistoric turkeys like was in the crap movie AVATAR im sure they travel(At tax payers expence)on goverment owned planes and cars

@Spurwing Plover: You show up on 10 posts, write about 12 sentences praising Trump, and calling people stupid.
Well genius, you misspelled at least 12 words in your diatribes.

@Spurwing Plover: they generally fly commercial airlines coach class