“An unstated premise of eco-pessimism is that environmental conditions are, or recently were, optimal. The proclaimed faith of eco-pessimists is weirdly optimistic: These optimal conditions must and can be preserved or restored if government will make us minimize our carbon footprints and if government will ‘remake’ the economy.” (George Will, 2009)

Climate alarmism is now in its 4th decade. It can be dated, at least, to James Hansen’s congressional testimony in mid-1988, which inspired the New York Times to report on the front page:

If the current pace of the buildup of these gases continues, the effect is likely to be a warming of 3 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit from the year 2025 to 2050…. The rise in global temperature is predicted to cause a thermal expansion of the oceans and to melt glaciers and polar ice, thus causing sea levels to rise by one to four feet by the middle of the next century.

The idea of presenting both sides of the debate in the name of scholarship is a non-starter with Andrew Dessler because the science is ‘settled,’ climate models have the correct physics, and he knows all he needs to in regard to climate economics, political economy, and public policy.

The Houston Chronicle‘s favorite climate scientist, Andrew Dessler of Texas A&M’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences, fancies himself as an energy and public policy expert. And so the Chronicle takes Dessler at face value well, even when he is outside his area of expertise.

Part II tomorrow dissects Dessler’s latest opinion piece for the Chronicle, A Just Transition from Fracking to Renewable Energy is Possible (February 28, 2020); this post looks more broadly at a climate alarmist swimming deep in the political soup.…

“We must also begin planning our economic recovery in a way that protects us from the impact of climate change and … accelerates a just transition off fossil fuels….”

“The ideas here draw on proposals from a range of Democratic primary campaigns, in particular those of Corey Booker, Julian Castro, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Jay Inslee, Bernie Sanders, Tom Steyer, and Elizabeth Warren.”

Reproduced below is an “Open Letter and Call to Action to Members of Congress” by a ad hoc group advertising itself as “climate and social policy experts in academia and civil society.” Signatories include

• Deep ecologist and New Yorker writer Bill McKibben;
• Climate campaigner, author, and ‘intellectual godmother of the Green New Deal‘ Naomi Klein; and
• Obama-era EPA Administrator, Harvard Professor and NRDC head Gina McCarthy; and

While fringe, the 5,000-word manifesto is noteworthy as an example of the latest Green New Deal thinking.…

The Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED) is an informal coalition of individuals and organizations interested in improving national, state, and local energy, environmental, and education policies. Our premise is that technical matters like these should be addressed by using Real Science (please consult WiseEnergy.org for more information).

A key element of AWED’s efforts is public education. Towards that end, every two± weeks we put together a newsletter to balance what is found in the mainstream media about energy and the environment. We appreciate MasterResource for their assistance in publishing this information.

Some of the more important articles in this issue are:
Study: Green New Deal would cost $75K per household in first year
Sorry Virtue Signalers, a Carbon Tax Would Have No Impact on Climate
14± million trees felled in Scotland for wind development, 2000–2019
Why Some Families Living Near Wind Facilities Contemplate Vacating Their Homes
The Misguided Green Virtue-Signaling of Solar Panel Mandates
Surprising Disadvantages of Using Solar Energy
Don’t like CO2?…