Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Oregon: At least one guy actually believes there is a significant link between telephone book delivery and Earth's climate
...If the bill is adopted, it would the one of the first times a state has been able to stop the mass delivery of telephone directories.

That’s fine with Albert Kaufman, a 47-year-old Northeast Portland community organizer who asked Bailey and Cannon to draft HB 3477. As far as Kaufman is concerned, telephone directories are a nuisance that not every household needs or wants. They’re also an environmental issue, because of the paper used to print them and the costs and effort to recycle them, he said.

I see it as an attempt to address global climate change,” Kaufman said. “That’s really the big selling point of this legislation. We’re cutting down forests to make telephone books and catalogs.
Still more pushback against the global warming scam: NAIC’s Climate Risk Survey Promotes Activists’ Agendas
A set of rules recently adopted by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) requires insurance companies to disclose information related to climate change, which, the [Washington Legal Foundation] says, serves mainly to promote the ideological objectives of global warming activists.

The paper, “Mandated ‘Climate Risk’ Disclosure: Turning Professional Activists into Insurance Inspectors,” written by Robert Detlefsen, VP of public policy for the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC), examines the potential impact of the NAIC’s recently adopted “Insurer Climate Risk Disclosure Survey,” which requires all insurers with annual premium of more than $300 million to submit the completed survey to the insurance department of the state in which they are domiciled beginning in May 2010.
The survey, Detlefsen writes, “requires much more than a straightforward disclosure of discrete, identifiable risks. By demanding that insurers disclose actions they are taking in response to their understanding of ‘climate change risks,’ the survey implies that insurers ought to take concrete action in response to risks they may not understand. It could be argued that insurance policyholders and the public interest would be better served if insurers refrained from taking action in response to things they don’t understand.”

Detlefsen cites leading climate scientists who contend that the links between global warming and specific weather-related perils, such as hurricanes, are still uncertain. “Even if the insurance risks stemming from global warming were fully understood, it is far from clear which actions available to insurers would actually be effective in combating global warming,” he writes.

No comments: