Climate Change [Hoax] Bill May Impact Multifamily Industry

THE CLIMATE CHANGE bill making its way through Congress has several provisions with big implications for multifamily owners and developers.

The industry’s biggest concern is a mandate that each state adopt aggressive energyeffi cient measures in its building codes for new construction and substantial rehabilitation projects. The bill requires the adoption of codes that exceed current codes by 30 percent, while mandating a 50 percent improvement over codes released after 2015.

Achieving those levels of energy efficiency so quickly is largely undoable, according to the National Multi Housing Council (NMHC). “It’s very aggressive,” says Paula Cino, director of environmental policy at NMHC. “We’re hoping for recognition that the existing targets are somewhat arbitrary; our research shows that it’s not really achievable.”

Kerry Didn't Get the Memo - Chris Horner - Planet Gore on National Review Online

Umm, Senator . . . I'm sorry but . . . haven't you heard? You have to be a scientist to be at all relevant to the discussion. Or did you miss the expose by Cal Tech physics grad and MIT Ph.D. economist, EPA whistleblower Alan Carlin, being dismissed as not the product of a climate scientist? He's "just an economist," like — as we never tire of pointing out here — the UN IPCC's "chief climate scientist," economist Rajendra Pachauri.

So, with all due respect, please report for duty somewhere else. With Drs. Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Keanu Reeves . . .

Causes on Facebook | Help Reuters Fight Global Warming

Promote the use of alternative energy sources, and provide business decision-makers with strategies for sustainable growth through reuters.com/greenbusiness

Does global warming diminish when measured accurately? Part 5

The upshot is that a series of provocative claims about worsening climate situations are published and used in political documents, and are later found to have serious problems with how data is treated. How is the skeptical community supposed to react when this happens three times, coming from people who form part of the contributing community at a website that has served as an influential communications tool, informing the public and policy decision makers? By making older temperatures look lower and more modern temperatures look higher, global warming looks worse. But if they are just statistical tricks, torturing the data, it really makes the scientists (and maybe the science) look worse... after the 'tricks' are exposed.

So what do we do the next time one of the Real Climate scientists comes out with alarming news? As some of even their critics acknowledge, their torturing of the data may obscure the fact that global warming is actually happening--that we focus on their mistakes, not the data that is collected. Who is really being hurt by episodes like this?