Coming Disaster from the Montgomery MD County Climate Task Force

Coming Disaster from the Montgomery County MD Climate Task Force.
Notes from Edward Hudgins
February 15, 2021
edwhudgins@aol.com, ehudgins@humanachievementalliance.org

A small group of activists, tasked by the Montgomery County Council to develop a “Climate Action Plan,” have issued their report. Comments on the plan to the county must be submitted by February 28, 2021. The plan is dangerous to all citizens and businesses of the county. Among the reasons:

  • Addressing the alleged threat of runaway global warming is not and should not be a county government priority or concern. The schooling system is seriously deficient in many parts of the county. We have crime problems. COVID has dealt a serious blow to businesses. These problems, not the alleged dangers from global warming, are the country government’s priorities and responsibilities.
  • The plan to make the country “carbon free” would impose costly, draconian measures on country citizens. The authors of the report admit that state and federal resources will be needed to implement the plan. This means, of course, that the county will need to beggar the taxpayers in the rest of the state and country to implement this scheme.
  • The authors of the report acknowledge that they have no measure whatsoever on how much their scheme will reduce warming. This is because the difference would be too small to measure. In other words, the scheme will make no difference in solving the supposed problem.
  • The scheme calls for total control by political elites of nearly every aspect of our lives to fight an alleged problem, control that they admit will make no measurable difference in global warming.  It would control all aspects of our buildings, houses, and transportation. Its “climate governance” provisions would rob citizens further of democratic checks on local government. The “Public Engagement, Partnerships, and Education” provision is propaganda and indoctrination of the crudest kind; this has already found its way into our schools.
  • The report’s assumptions and predictions of alleged warming are unsound and easily challenged with solid scientific evidence. Yet, by the admission of the authors, during the review period for this plan they will not entertain challenges to their assumptions. In other words, they are operating either on pop culture bromides or politicized ideology, an irresponsible disregard for the plan’s impact on the county citizens.
  • The building code, transportation and energy policies in the plan will make doing business in the already-high-priced county even more difficult.
  • If CO2 producing excess warming were a problem, the county’s plan ignores a proven way to reduce these levels. Since 2000, America’s annual CO2 output has dropped from 5.94 gigatons to 5.11 gigatons thanks to the increased use of natural gas, thanks to the boom in hydraulic fracking, yet fracking is banned in Maryland. (See below.)
  • Also, the wind turbines, solar devices, and storage batteries promoted as fossil fuel alternatives involve serious environmental harm from mining of the rare earth elements, cobalt and lithium they employ, and they incorporate petroleum-based produces. Rather than eliminating all uses of fossil fuels, carbon sequestration would be a better strategy.
  • The plan touts “racial justice” by arguing, without a sound scientific foundation, that minorities will be especially harmed by alleged warming. In fact, the higher prices for energy, doing business and much else will fall on less prosperous blacks and Hispanics most of all.
  • The policies foisted on county residents further limit liberty, robbing from individuals the choices about uses of property, consumption of goods and services, and those policies place those choices in the hands of authoritarian central planners.
  • This plan, and how it was developed, will serve as a dangerous template that will be applied in other counties and jurisdictions.

(The Appendix below gives data countering the unsound science on which the report is based.)

In short, the plan would be a body blow to the economy, prosperity and liberty of county citizens, all in pursuit of a ideological policies that proponents themselves admit will have no measurable impact on the warming they fear.

Citizens should speak out on the dangers of this plan by contacted council members.

COUNCIL MEMBERS

Gabe Albornoz240-777-7959Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Gabe Albornoz
Andrew Friedson240-777-7828Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Andrew Friedson
Evan Glass240-777-7966Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Evan Glass
Tom Hucker240-777-7960Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Tom Hucker
Will Jawando240-777-7811Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Will Jawando
Sidney Katz240-777-7906Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Sidney Katz
Nancy Navarro240-777-7968Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Nancy Navarro
Craig Rice240-777-7955Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Craig Rice
Hans Riemer240-777-7964Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.govView Staff List for Hans Riemer

APPENDIX

Failed warming prediction. Warning predictions have been wildly off and the science is by no means settled. E.g., in 1990, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change First Assessment Report predicted global temperature would rise by 0.3 degrees C per decade or 3 C per century. (p. xxii)[1]  But in 2014 in its Fifth report it lowered its prediction to just 0.2 degrees C per decade or 2 C per century. (p. 4).[2] However, empirical temperature data covering the three decades following 1990 show the average global temperature rise has been only about 0.13 degrees C per decade or 1.3 C per century, not far off from the average rise in the past century or so, and less than half the pace IPCC predicted.[3]

Clean data shows little warming.  The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s “Climate Reference Network,” a network of more than 100 pristine weather stations throughout the lower 48 states, went into operation in 2005 to obtain accurate climate data, not subject to distortion caused, for example, by older stations that might be measuring local heat sinks, for example, those placed near airport runways. Since 2005, the CRN has found no net warming, possibly a pause since climate has been warming for centuries since the end of the “Little Ice Age.” [4]

Global temperatures are always rising and falling. The term “climate change” is intentionally misleading since climate is always changing. A look at changes over the past thousands and hundreds or thousands of years show swings from warm to cool without any contributing human activity.

Source: “First Assessment Report,” U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1990, p. 202, https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf.

Ice cores confirm temperature fluctuations. Greenland ice cores, using a temperature proxy, on a figure with current time on the left and past centuries on the right, also show temperature fluctuations when no human activity was involved.

Fracking has reduced American CO2 output. Even if you do fear CO2 driving warming, consider that in 2000, America emitted 5.94 gigatons of CO2, 23 percent of the then total global total (25.7 gigatons). Since then, thanks in large part to rise of hydraulic fracturing producing low-cost, clean natural gas, we reduced emissions by about 14 percent, to 5.11 gigatons.[5] FYI: The increase in Chinese CO2 emissions from 2000 to 2017 (7.21 gigatons) is greater than the entire current annual U.S. CO2 emissions. So why not lobby to lift the fracking ban in Maryland?


[1] “First Assessment Report,” U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1990, p. xxii, https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf.

[2] “Fifth Assessment Report,” U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014, https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf.

[3] Roy Spencer, “Global Warming,” drroyspencer.com, January 2, 2019, http://www.drroyspencer.com/2019/01/uah-global-temperature-update-for-december-2018-0-25-deg-c/

[4] Data provided by U.S. Climate Reference Network, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, accessed August 2019, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn.

[5] “Trends in Global CO2 and Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 2018 Report,” PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, December 2018, p. 38, https://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/pbl-2018-trends-in-global-co2-and-total-greenhouse-gas-emissons-2018-report_3125.pdf

Posted in

Edward Hudgins

Leave a Comment





Categories

Subscribe!