Build Back Better’s climate pork will benefit the rich — but not the environment

The irony of the Build Back Better bill passed in the House with Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s brute force last week is that it is called a “reconciliation” bill, since it attempts to straddle so many irreconcilable differences in the Democratic Party.

The whole mess now moves to the Senate, where two things are certain: The final bill, if it passes at all, will be drastically different from the House bill; and the final bill will contain hundreds of billions for “climate-change action” and “clean energy” because this (along with racism) is the central mania of the Democratic Party today.

Aside from the huge price tag, will the climate and energy features add up to a serious and coherent policy? If the House bill is any indication, the answer is a resounding “No.”

The headline is that Build Back Better includes more than $500 billion for climate and clean-energy measures, but keep in mind that the already-passed bipartisan infrastructure bill included $150 billion for clean-energy baubles such as electric-vehicle chargers ($7.5 billion) and electric school buses ($5 billion), so the grand total of both bills would be about $650 billion.

What are we actually getting for that eye-popping sum?

Some of the infrastructure bill targets worthy improvements, such as $65 billion for upgrading our creaky electricity grid and $50 billion for “climate resilience,” which includes common-sense steps such as building more robust defenses against flooding and better managing national forests to reduce wildfire risk.

The bulk of the Build Back Better bill, on the other hand, consists of large tax credits and subsidies for special interests with marginal benefits — and, incredibly, still more tax breaks for the affluent on top of the reinstatement of the state and local tax deduction that will deliver more than 90 percent of its benefits to the top 1 percent of income earners.

Keep reading

New Yorker Amplifies Calls For Pipeline Bombings To Save The Planet

The New Yorker amplified calls for eco-terrorism in the name of sparking action on climate change last week by inviting Andreas Malm, the Swedish author of “How To Blow Up A Pipeline,” onto its podcast.

In the episode titled “How to Blow Up a Pipeline,” Malm explains how it’s time for the climate change movement to “diversify its tactics and move away from an exclusive focus on polite, gentle, and perfectly peaceful civil disobedience.”

Malm stopped his recommendations short of “kidnapping oil workers” but said that “civil disobedience” ostensibly to save the planet should include mass acts of “intelligent sabotage” and property destruction, such as blowing up pipelines.

“I’m not saying we should stop strikes or square occupations or demonstrations of the usual kind. I’m all in favor of that. But I do think we need to step up because so little has changed and so many investments are still being poured into new fossil fuel projects,” Malm said. “So I am in favor of destroying machines, property — not harming people, that’s a very, very important distinction there. And I think property can be destroyed in all manner of ways, or it can be neutralized in a very gentle fashion as when we defeated the SUVs, or in a more spectacular fashion, as in potentially blowing up a pipeline that’s under construction. That’s something that people have done.”

“So you’re recommending blowing up a pipeline,” the host confirmed.

Malm justified such actions by claiming that the supposedly moral pros of combatting the “climate crisis” outweigh the cons.

“I don’t see how that property damage could be considered morally legitimate, given what we know of the consequences of such a project,” Malm said. 

The author also pledged “to be part of any kind of action of the sort that I advocate in the book” before criticizing the climate change movement’s tendency toward nonviolent protest.

Keep reading

Eco-warriors Meghan and Harry return to California in private jet after VIP woke tour of NYC: Duchess’s OTT outfits and Harry’s mystery wire suggest that the real reason for bizarre trip was content for their Netflix series

Harry and Meghan have touched down in Santa Barbara, California to be reunited with their children Archie and Lilibet after their whirlwind tour of New York – after a wire poking out of Harry’s pocket suggests the trip will be part of their multi-million dollar Netflix deal.

Exclusive pictures obtained by DailyMail.com show the Duke and Duchess of Sussex returning home Saturday night.

Touching down in their private jet, the virtue signaling couple and fossil fueled ‘eco-warriors’ embraced members of staff who had accompanied them on the pseudo royal tour before heading back to their Montecito mansion.

Landing back in California late Saturday Meghan, 40, ditched the block color power dressing that saw some social media users mock her as a Michelle Obama wannabe.

Instead, she appeared casual and relaxed, dressed in loose camel sweater and black pants as she embraced the members of staff who constitute the retired royals’ neo ‘court’ for the trip that began Thursday morning, with a visit to the World Trade Center memorial and Freedom Tower in the company of New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and the state’s new governor Kathy Hochul.

Meghan look-a-like, and head of the couple’s PR Christine Schirmer was among the staff whom the Sussex fondly hugged goodbye at Santa Barbara’s private airport Saturday.

The former Silicon valley big-wig was recently appointed by the couple having worked at Pinterest until last summer. She is a fellow Northwestern University graduate like Meghan.

Harry, 37, was also low-key when he touched down on the west coast last night, swapping his New York suits for navy jeans, a light casual sweater and buff suede boots as he arrived laden with bags which he loaded into a waiting Jeep.

Earlier, the couple had wrapped up their three-day stint on the East coast with an appearance on stage at Central Park’s Global Citizens Festival, dubbed ‘Wokestock.’

Keep reading

Study shows common insecticide is harmful in any amount

A new UC Riverside study shows that a type of insecticide made for commercial plant nurseries is harmful to a typical bee even when applied well below the label rate.

The study was published today in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

Chemically similar to nicotine, neonicotinoids are insecticides that protect against plant-consuming insects like aphids, but seriously harm beneficial insects, like bees. They are widely used by commercial growers.

Much research has focused on their use in food crops like canola, in which they are typically applied at low doses. However, this study is one of the few to examine neonicotinoid application in potted ornamental plants, which can represent more potent, acute sources of exposure to the toxin for bees.

“Neonicotinoids are often used on food crops as a seed treatment,” explained UCR entomologist and lead study author Jacob Cecala. “But they’re usually applied in higher amounts to ornamental plants for aesthetic reasons. The effects are deadly no matter how much the plants are watered.”

Keep reading

Nearly 1.6 billion disposable masks polluted oceans in 2020, will take 450 years to decompose

Nearly1.6 billion disposable face masks ended up in the earth’s oceans in 2020, out of the roughly 52 billion produced in response to the pandemic, according to a new study.

While governments around the world continue to support mask mandates in public spaces, the impact of disposable masks is only just emerging.

The report, by the Hong Kong-based marine conservation group OceansAsia, title “Masks on the Beach,” also estimated that roughly 5,500 tons of plastic pollution entered the ocean in 2020 from masks.

The figure is equal to 7% of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a mass of plastic debris floating in the ocean that is twice the size of Texas.

While a cigarette butt or plastic bag takes 20 years or less to degrade in the ocean, according to Visual Capitalist, a plastic bottle, disposable diaper or a disposable mask takes nearly 450 years to fully break down. 

The majority of disposable masks – like N95 respirators and surgical masks – were produced in China factories, which were reportedly producing 450 million masks per day in April 2020. 

Keep reading

Biden Nominee Edited Radical Ecoterrorist Newsletter Advocating Violence Against Government Officials

Tracy Stone-Manning, President Joe Biden’s nominee to lead the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), helped edit a radical environmental newsletter that advocated for violent action and sought to further the mission of the extremist group Earth First!, whose members committed acts of ecoterrorism in the 1980s and 1990s.

Stone-Manning testified that she “helped edit” a local Earth First! newsletter called the Wild Rockies Review while she was a graduate student at the University of Montana in Missoula 30 years ago.

Though the editors and contributors of the Wild Rockies Review at that time frequently used pseudonyms or just last names to avoid legal consequences for their writings, multiple issues listed a “Stone” under “Assistance” on their mastheads. Stone-Manning went by “Tracy Stone” before she was married.

One such issue was the “Autumnal Equinox Issue,” labeled Vol. 1, No. 3. Also named under “Assistance” on that issue’s masthead was Stone-Manning’s classmate Bill Haskins, who was one of seven, including Stone-Manning, who were subpoenaed in 1989 over a tree spiking crime.

Keep reading