Election 2010: Gillard devotes 12 words to climate | Australian Climate Madness

Er, that's it. That's how highly Labor, the party that was so desperate to push through the ETS before the Copenhagen climate conference in December 2009, now regards the "greatest moral challenge since the dawn of time (or something)". And where is the Labor-loving media on this shameless backflip? Nowhere to be seen, of course.

BlueGreen Alliance Forgets their Aristophanes | GlobalWarming.org

To institute cap-and-trade, the BlueGreen Alliance folks would have to sneak into the Senate, don Republican disguises, and give Tom Udall and his pals a 67 vote majority.

The Reference Frame: Can a rare heat wave in a big city occur by chance?

If you want to properly understand the frequency of events that occur once a century or less, you must abandon your intuition from the everyday life and you must understand that your life experience is just a tiny speck of noise that can't matter in this reasoning. You must focus on the maths and on the actual evidence that tells us what is actually happening in the long run. I assure you that if you do all these things properly, you will conclude that the "rare events" we sometimes see are no signal that "something strange has to be going on". In fact, they inevitably have to occur somewhere.

A climate policy for people and the environment | Grist

Start with the price: To reach the widely discussed goal of a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions by 2020, the price of emitting a ton of carbon dioxide in that year should be $75. That's definitely higher than Congress has been contemplating.

How could anyone afford that? It's simple. If most of the carbon revenues are refunded to households on an equal per capita basis, then a large majority of Americans will come out ahead. That is, your refund will be larger than the amount you pay for carbon emissions. If 85 percent of carbon revenues are refunded to households, then four-fifths of the country, including a majority in every state, will be better off. That's a bigger refund than Congress has yet considered.

Under such a policy, you'd pay a lot for carbon emissions, at the gas pump and on your electric bill ­-- but you'd get it all back, and more, in your refund check. You would come out even farther ahead if you save energy, whether by turning off unneeded lights or by buying a more fuel-efficient car. Then you'd pay less but still get the same refund. That's the point of the plan: the market incentive to reduce emissions. [But don't we already save money if we turn off the lights?]

Hot Russian Climate Porn « Shub Niggurath Climate

The first thing if you are a self-respecting catastrophic anthropogenic global warming proponent — you have to make use of the summer. I mean, if you cannot capitalize on the hot part of the year, what good are you to the movement?

But you see, there is a chasm to be bridged over. You have to switch over from constantly beating the “weather is not climate” drum during the winter, loosen up on your inhibitions and sense of shame, and start saying: “A-ha! Now here’s weather we can actually call climate”.