In this newsletter:
1) Germany sets windfall tax at 90% for clean power generators
Bloomberg, 24 November 2022
2) Europe’s energy crisis set to linger for years, industry warns
Financial Times, 24 November 2022
3) WSJ: Europe pays for green-energy illusions
The Wall Street Journal, 22 November 2022
4) Climate wars escalate: EU fears trade war with US in row over Biden's green subsidies
The Daily Telegraph, 25 November 2022
5) Liz Truss and Boris Johnson join green Tory rebellion against Sunak for onshore wind
Bloomberg, 25 November 2022
The Wall Street Journal, 22 November 2022
4) Climate wars escalate: EU fears trade war with US in row over Biden's green subsidies
The Daily Telegraph, 25 November 2022
5) Liz Truss and Boris Johnson join green Tory rebellion against Sunak for onshore wind
Bloomberg, 25 November 2022
6) Flow of Russian gas and cash entangled German state in dependent web
The Washington Post, 23 November 2022
The Washington Post, 23 November 2022
7) Europe needs to start fracking now! Hungary could have shale gas lasting a century
Hungary Today, 25 November 2022
Hungary Today, 25 November 2022
8) Biden’s new climate change rules would smack government contractors with a $604 billion bill
The Washington Times, 25 November 2022
The Washington Times, 25 November 2022
9) Tom Basile: Climate cult meets reparations lunacy
The Washington Times, 25 November 2022
Full details:
1) Germany sets windfall tax at 90% for clean power generators
Bloomberg, 24 November 2022
Germany has set out its plan to claw back 90% of the earnings from some clean power generators as the government seeks funding for its consumer aid package.
The government is planning to skim earnings above €130 a megawatt-hour for solar, wind and nuclear, according to a draft law seen by Bloomberg News. Politicians are trying to reclaim some of the profits that companies like RWE AG are making from high power prices.
The windfall tax will be applied to electricity producers based on the fuel they use. Lignite plants will be taxed on earnings above €82 a megawatt hour and oil plants above €280. The measures will apply for 10 months, backdated to start of September 2022, until end June 2023 and could be extended to end of 2024.
Germany set out a €54 billion package on November 22 that puts a cap on gas prices for companies and households from next year with more earmarked for electricity. The aid for bills will be partly financed by the windfall tax, from which the government expects to raise a double-digit billion-euro amount, according to officials.
The level proposed is lower than the European Commission’s suggested level of €180 a megawatt hour. Renewable generators in Germany have warned that such a levy will deter investment needed to help the nation wean itself off imported fossil fuels.
The more than 200-page-long law proposal, which is supposed to pass cabinet on Friday, has already provoked widespread criticism from energy lobby groups. Andreas Jung, a lawmaker from the oppositional Christian Democrats, said that the levy will “suffocate” renewable energy companies because they have been investing a lot of money in new technology.
The law is scheduled to pass the upper house on December 16 so that it can go into effect on January 1.
2) Europe’s energy crisis set to linger for years, industry warns
Financial Times, 24 November 2022
Europe’s energy crisis is set to persist for years if the region fails to reduce demand and secure new gas supplies, according to fresh warnings from energy industry executives and analysts.
Mild autumn weather and a dash to fill up storage sites across Europe has bolstered the region’s energy security this winter, but concerns are starting to mount over whether sufficient supplies will be available next summer and for the winter that follows.
“We are in a gas crisis, and we will continue to be in a little bit of a crisis mode for the next two or three years,” said Sid Bambawale, head of liquefied natural gas for the Asia region at Vitol, the world’s largest independent energy trader, speaking at the Financial Times Commodities Asia Summit in Singapore. “So let’s not develop a false sense of security.”
The warnings present European policymakers with an uncomfortable reality. Despite having already spent hundreds of billions of euros ensuring storage sites are filled this winter and providing support to households and businesses, the strain on public funds as well as pain for households and businesses are likely to continue next year.
The renewed concerns ensue as flows of gas from Russia have come to a near standstill in response to western sanctions for Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine. A new threat this week from Moscow to limit output from the only remaining pipeline connecting Russia and Europe has highlighted the importance of locking-in supplies from other global producers and taking action to reduce fuel consumption by industry and householders.
Kosuke Tanaka, head of Asian LNG origination at Japan’s energy trader Jera Global Markets, said: “The [gas] market is currently balanced with demand destruction, including fuel switching to oil and coal. And we will still need such demand response to balance the market in the coming years.”
Full story
3) WSJ: Europe Pays for Green-Energy Illusions
The Wall Street Journal, 22 November 2022
The Wall Street Journal, 22 November 2022
Europe is struggling to keep its lights and the heat on this winter, and fuel supply is only half of the energy crisis. The other half, now coming into view, is the ruinous fiscal cost associated with the failure of green-energy flights of fancy. European taxpayers will pay this bill for years to come.
Governments across Europe have announced €674 billion ($696 billion) in handouts and subsidies to alleviate the burden of skyrocketing energy prices between September 2021 and October 2022, according to Bruegel, the Brussels-based think tank. The money includes €264 billion in Germany alone and the equivalent of €97 billion in the United Kingdom. This is on top of what households and businesses are paying in higher energy bills even after the subsidies.
Some policies will help. Almost every European country has reduced excise taxes on fuel. This is a rare instance of the energy crisis forcing a beneficial rethink of green fixations—in this case, Europe’s tendency to treat energy levies as a green “sin tax.” But for the most part the money is subsidizing households and businesses directly or indirectly. One common tactic is to impose a retail price cap, with taxpayers plugging the gap between the costs that utilities must pay for energy and what they’re allowed to charge consumers.
A special dishonorable mention goes to countries such as France and Germany whose energy policies have dragged the government directly into the utility business. Paris has turned majority-state-owned utility EDF into a subsidy slush fund, using state control to limit retail prices today while apparently hoping taxpayers won’t notice plunging dividends or a big equity injection tomorrow. Berlin may nationalize Uniper and is offering tens of billions of euros in subsidized credit to other utilities.
This tabulation assumes “temporary” subsidies will expire on schedule, such as Britain’s energy price cap that’s due to end in April. If you think politicians will do that willingly, we have a hydropower dam in the Sahara to sell you.
This tally doesn’t include costs associated with the race to build new energy infrastructure, especially to import natural gas from sources other than Russia. Governments seem to be in denial about how to encourage private investment to shoulder more of this load.
Politicians still claim their medium-term plan is to ramp up renewables such as wind and solar. But those subsidies will skew incentives against investing in gas terminals or pipelines and the like. Taxpayers may end up footing bills that private investors would have been willing to pay if politicians hadn’t promised to put fossil fuels out of business within 10-15 years. Governments also are rushing to impose windfall taxes on the profits from the fossil-fuel investments they say they want to encourage.
Add it all to the tab. It’s impossible to say how much money Europe has wasted on its failed green-energy transition over the past few decades. Estimates for Germany alone start in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Taxpayers shouldn’t be surprised if their total bill to bail out that failed energy transition tops $1 trillion in coming years. When it comes to green energy, the motto is “pay, and pay again.”
Governments across Europe have announced €674 billion ($696 billion) in handouts and subsidies to alleviate the burden of skyrocketing energy prices between September 2021 and October 2022, according to Bruegel, the Brussels-based think tank. The money includes €264 billion in Germany alone and the equivalent of €97 billion in the United Kingdom. This is on top of what households and businesses are paying in higher energy bills even after the subsidies.
Some policies will help. Almost every European country has reduced excise taxes on fuel. This is a rare instance of the energy crisis forcing a beneficial rethink of green fixations—in this case, Europe’s tendency to treat energy levies as a green “sin tax.” But for the most part the money is subsidizing households and businesses directly or indirectly. One common tactic is to impose a retail price cap, with taxpayers plugging the gap between the costs that utilities must pay for energy and what they’re allowed to charge consumers.
A special dishonorable mention goes to countries such as France and Germany whose energy policies have dragged the government directly into the utility business. Paris has turned majority-state-owned utility EDF into a subsidy slush fund, using state control to limit retail prices today while apparently hoping taxpayers won’t notice plunging dividends or a big equity injection tomorrow. Berlin may nationalize Uniper and is offering tens of billions of euros in subsidized credit to other utilities.
This tabulation assumes “temporary” subsidies will expire on schedule, such as Britain’s energy price cap that’s due to end in April. If you think politicians will do that willingly, we have a hydropower dam in the Sahara to sell you.
This tally doesn’t include costs associated with the race to build new energy infrastructure, especially to import natural gas from sources other than Russia. Governments seem to be in denial about how to encourage private investment to shoulder more of this load.
Politicians still claim their medium-term plan is to ramp up renewables such as wind and solar. But those subsidies will skew incentives against investing in gas terminals or pipelines and the like. Taxpayers may end up footing bills that private investors would have been willing to pay if politicians hadn’t promised to put fossil fuels out of business within 10-15 years. Governments also are rushing to impose windfall taxes on the profits from the fossil-fuel investments they say they want to encourage.
Add it all to the tab. It’s impossible to say how much money Europe has wasted on its failed green-energy transition over the past few decades. Estimates for Germany alone start in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Taxpayers shouldn’t be surprised if their total bill to bail out that failed energy transition tops $1 trillion in coming years. When it comes to green energy, the motto is “pay, and pay again.”
4) Climate wars escalate: EU fears trade war with US in row over Biden's green subsidies
The Daily Telegraph, 25 November 2022
EU ministers are trying to head off a trade war with the US as Brussels and Washington lock horns over $369bn (£304.8bn) of green subsidies being pushed by Joe Biden.
Officials on the two continents have set up a taskforce to assess the impact of the US’s ambitious climate legislation - the Inflation Reduction Act - which has stipulations to "buy American", and European governments are growing frustrated.
Germany's economy minister Robert Habeck called for Europe to step up competition with the United States, saying the world's largest economic powers are going to compete over who will be able to create a lead market for a climate-neutral and green industry.
The amount of money Germany is pushing towards creating a green economy is competitive with the US, Habeck told the Bundestag lower house of parliament today, but the task is to become quicker and more decisive in applying the funds.
It comes as Jozef Sikela, the Czech minister who is chairing a meeting of EU trade ministers in Brussels today, said he wanted solutions over the US subsidies by the next meeting of a separate bilateral Trade and Technology Council (TTC) on December 5, according to the Financial Times.
"What is important for us is that the US is aware of our concerns and the taskforce has to work out a solution which will be acceptable for both parties," he added.
"We will focus on having certain solutions in place for the TTC on December 5."
The Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law by President Biden in August and aims to spend $369bn on tackling energy and climate change.
However it has caused anxiety with the EU as it could lead to a serious trade dispute just as the world tries to tackle energy supply problems caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
5) Liz Truss and Boris Johnson join green Tory rebellion against Sunak for onshore wind
Bloomberg, 25 November 2022
Officials on the two continents have set up a taskforce to assess the impact of the US’s ambitious climate legislation - the Inflation Reduction Act - which has stipulations to "buy American", and European governments are growing frustrated.
Germany's economy minister Robert Habeck called for Europe to step up competition with the United States, saying the world's largest economic powers are going to compete over who will be able to create a lead market for a climate-neutral and green industry.
The amount of money Germany is pushing towards creating a green economy is competitive with the US, Habeck told the Bundestag lower house of parliament today, but the task is to become quicker and more decisive in applying the funds.
It comes as Jozef Sikela, the Czech minister who is chairing a meeting of EU trade ministers in Brussels today, said he wanted solutions over the US subsidies by the next meeting of a separate bilateral Trade and Technology Council (TTC) on December 5, according to the Financial Times.
"What is important for us is that the US is aware of our concerns and the taskforce has to work out a solution which will be acceptable for both parties," he added.
"We will focus on having certain solutions in place for the TTC on December 5."
The Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law by President Biden in August and aims to spend $369bn on tackling energy and climate change.
However it has caused anxiety with the EU as it could lead to a serious trade dispute just as the world tries to tackle energy supply problems caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
5) Liz Truss and Boris Johnson join green Tory rebellion against Sunak for onshore wind
Bloomberg, 25 November 2022
Former prime ministers Liz Truss and Boris Johnson joined a parliamentary rebellion aiming to overturn England’s effective ban on onshore wind farms, creating a fresh headache for UK leader Rishi Sunak.
Both Truss and Johnson signed an amendment to the government’s Levelling Up legislation brought by Tory MP Simon Clarke -- who served in Truss’s cabinet -- which would ease current restrictions on onshore wind. It’s their first public act of dissent against Sunak’s government.
Building onshore wind farms is one of the quickest and cheapest ways to add new electricity generation, requiring far less time and equipment than their giant counterparts offshore. They could be critical to meeting the UK’s net zero carbon emissions target by 2050, while also helping to wean the country off expensive, imported natural gas that’s driving a cost-of-living crisis.
“Onshore wind and solar energy are clean, cheap and popular,” said Alethea Warrington, campaigns manager at climate charity Possible. “Unblocking new onshore wind and ensuring solar energy can come forwards across the UK would cut emissions and insulate communities from the worst shocks of this fossil-fueled energy crisis.”
Truss and Johnson’s support for the measure shows how Britain’s two most-recent premiers may not intend to make life easy for the current incumbent of 10 Downing Street, and highlights the deep divisions in the Conservative Party that Sunak must manage.
Full story
Both Truss and Johnson signed an amendment to the government’s Levelling Up legislation brought by Tory MP Simon Clarke -- who served in Truss’s cabinet -- which would ease current restrictions on onshore wind. It’s their first public act of dissent against Sunak’s government.
Building onshore wind farms is one of the quickest and cheapest ways to add new electricity generation, requiring far less time and equipment than their giant counterparts offshore. They could be critical to meeting the UK’s net zero carbon emissions target by 2050, while also helping to wean the country off expensive, imported natural gas that’s driving a cost-of-living crisis.
“Onshore wind and solar energy are clean, cheap and popular,” said Alethea Warrington, campaigns manager at climate charity Possible. “Unblocking new onshore wind and ensuring solar energy can come forwards across the UK would cut emissions and insulate communities from the worst shocks of this fossil-fueled energy crisis.”
Truss and Johnson’s support for the measure shows how Britain’s two most-recent premiers may not intend to make life easy for the current incumbent of 10 Downing Street, and highlights the deep divisions in the Conservative Party that Sunak must manage.
Full story
Green Tory Britain: Cold, expensive, unreliable and ugly
6) Flow of Russian gas and cash entangled German state in dependent web
The Washington Post, 23 November 2022
The Washington Post, 23 November 2022
Opaque Russian-funded climate foundation is at the center of questions about Moscow’s influence on German energy policies
SCHWERIN, Germany — When Matthias Warnig, chief executive of the company building the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline between Russia and Germany, arrived for a meeting at the historic lakeside state chancellery building here, he carried a bright bouquet of flowers.
It was August 2020 and Trump administration sanctions on the nearly constructed pipeline under the Baltic Sea had caused final work on the project to grind to a halt. Warnig, a former officer in the Stasi, East Germany’s secret police, was looking for ways around the U.S. action.
His quest — and his gift of sunflowers and snapdragons — found a receptive audience.
“It is outrageous,” said Manuela Schwesig, head of the German state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, of the U.S. move to target any firm helping to complete the pipeline. Two gas routes — Nord Stream 1 and 2 — came ashore in her northern German state.
“But,” Schwesig continued after her meeting with Warnig, “I’m confident we’ll find a solution.”
The eventual solution was the creation by the state government of an opaque, largely Russian-funded climate foundation designed to complete the construction while shielding the firms it contracted with from U.S. sanctions. The expectation was that a German state entity would not be put under U.S. sanctions, and that the foundation would quietly act as the pipeline contractor while maintaining a public facade focused on environmental issues.
Following Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the Foundation for Climate and Environmental Protection has become an emblem of how Germany’s craving for natural gas led to a dependent, murky relationship with Moscow. The foundation was just one cog in a vast Russian influence network in Germany, one that expanded in tandem with the country’s growing dependency on gas.
Just before the invasion, Germany was reliant on Moscow for more than half of its natural gas and coal and a third of its oil. A subsidiary of Russian state energy giant Gazprom owned Germany’s largest gas storage facility — the size of 910 football pitches — which was drained by the beginning of the war, lying less than 5 percent full as Moscow slowed deliveries. Russia also held a majority stake in the country’s most important national gas transporter and owned the refinery that fed crucial fuel supplies to Berlin.
Some of Germany’s most senior former politicians, as well as think tanks, foundations, sports clubs and cultural organizations across the country, were awash in Russian cash. Gazprom and its subsidiaries sponsored soccer and volleyball teams, a sailing race, a classical music festival, art galleries and even “Blue Fire,” a natural-gas-themed roller coaster at Germany’s largest theme park.
“You find Russian money even when you’re not looking,” said Gerhard Bley, a researcher with Transparency International. “With today’s hindsight, it’s hard to see how we got here and how warnings were ignored for so long.”
Hundreds of pages of documents made public in freedom of information requests and interviews with federal and state officials reveal how closely Nord Stream 2 executives and local government officials here worked together to protect the new pipeline, amid questions from lawmakers over whether lobbying crossed the line into political corruption.
Officials in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania first said the supposedly independent climate entity was financed with 200,000 euros in state funds and another 20 million euros from Gazprom. Its main aim, Schwesig said, would be to support environmentalism, though officials said at the time that the foundation would have a role in finishing the pipeline.
Full story
SCHWERIN, Germany — When Matthias Warnig, chief executive of the company building the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline between Russia and Germany, arrived for a meeting at the historic lakeside state chancellery building here, he carried a bright bouquet of flowers.
It was August 2020 and Trump administration sanctions on the nearly constructed pipeline under the Baltic Sea had caused final work on the project to grind to a halt. Warnig, a former officer in the Stasi, East Germany’s secret police, was looking for ways around the U.S. action.
His quest — and his gift of sunflowers and snapdragons — found a receptive audience.
“It is outrageous,” said Manuela Schwesig, head of the German state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, of the U.S. move to target any firm helping to complete the pipeline. Two gas routes — Nord Stream 1 and 2 — came ashore in her northern German state.
“But,” Schwesig continued after her meeting with Warnig, “I’m confident we’ll find a solution.”
The eventual solution was the creation by the state government of an opaque, largely Russian-funded climate foundation designed to complete the construction while shielding the firms it contracted with from U.S. sanctions. The expectation was that a German state entity would not be put under U.S. sanctions, and that the foundation would quietly act as the pipeline contractor while maintaining a public facade focused on environmental issues.
Following Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the Foundation for Climate and Environmental Protection has become an emblem of how Germany’s craving for natural gas led to a dependent, murky relationship with Moscow. The foundation was just one cog in a vast Russian influence network in Germany, one that expanded in tandem with the country’s growing dependency on gas.
Just before the invasion, Germany was reliant on Moscow for more than half of its natural gas and coal and a third of its oil. A subsidiary of Russian state energy giant Gazprom owned Germany’s largest gas storage facility — the size of 910 football pitches — which was drained by the beginning of the war, lying less than 5 percent full as Moscow slowed deliveries. Russia also held a majority stake in the country’s most important national gas transporter and owned the refinery that fed crucial fuel supplies to Berlin.
Some of Germany’s most senior former politicians, as well as think tanks, foundations, sports clubs and cultural organizations across the country, were awash in Russian cash. Gazprom and its subsidiaries sponsored soccer and volleyball teams, a sailing race, a classical music festival, art galleries and even “Blue Fire,” a natural-gas-themed roller coaster at Germany’s largest theme park.
“You find Russian money even when you’re not looking,” said Gerhard Bley, a researcher with Transparency International. “With today’s hindsight, it’s hard to see how we got here and how warnings were ignored for so long.”
Hundreds of pages of documents made public in freedom of information requests and interviews with federal and state officials reveal how closely Nord Stream 2 executives and local government officials here worked together to protect the new pipeline, amid questions from lawmakers over whether lobbying crossed the line into political corruption.
Officials in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania first said the supposedly independent climate entity was financed with 200,000 euros in state funds and another 20 million euros from Gazprom. Its main aim, Schwesig said, would be to support environmentalism, though officials said at the time that the foundation would have a role in finishing the pipeline.
Full story
7) Europe needs to start fracking now! Hungary could have shale gas lasting a century
Hungary Today, 25 November 2022
Shale gas extraction in Hungary could start as early as January 2023
Hungary Today, 25 November 2022
Shale gas extraction in Hungary could start as early as January 2023
The Corvinus project, designed to kick-start shale gas extraction in Hungary, aims to ensure that the natural gas field in Békés county, at a depth of 3,700-4,500 metres, can be exploited as soon as possible, reported the economy portal Világgazdaság.
Former Minister of Innovation and Technology László Palkovics said encouragingly in early October that a priority was to review the Energy Strategy, including a significant reduction in the share of natural gas in the energy mix. The current national gas demand of 11.1 billion cubic meters per year would be reduced to 9.2 billion in the medium term, by 2030, and to 3.9 billion in the long term, by 2050. 40 percent of this would be imports. But the Hungarian government declared an energy emergency in the summer of 2022, and its action plan to address it includes an increase in domestic gas production from 1.5 billion cubic meters per year to at least 2 billion.
The ex-minister said in a statement in October that this could be done by 2023 without opening new fields. The project has been declared a priority investment by the government and is therefore exempted from the normal rules on historical monuments, environmental protection and local building regulations.
Full story
Former Minister of Innovation and Technology László Palkovics said encouragingly in early October that a priority was to review the Energy Strategy, including a significant reduction in the share of natural gas in the energy mix. The current national gas demand of 11.1 billion cubic meters per year would be reduced to 9.2 billion in the medium term, by 2030, and to 3.9 billion in the long term, by 2050. 40 percent of this would be imports. But the Hungarian government declared an energy emergency in the summer of 2022, and its action plan to address it includes an increase in domestic gas production from 1.5 billion cubic meters per year to at least 2 billion.
The ex-minister said in a statement in October that this could be done by 2023 without opening new fields. The project has been declared a priority investment by the government and is therefore exempted from the normal rules on historical monuments, environmental protection and local building regulations.
Full story
8) Biden’s new climate change rules would smack government contractors with a $604 billion bill
The Washington Times, 25 November 2022
Small businesses could be shut out of lucrative government contracts because of the massive compliance costs imposed under a proposed Biden administration rule that would require large federal contractors to reduce and publicly disclose their greenhouse gas emissions.
The proposed rule would make the U.S. the first national government to require major federal contractors to set climate goals in line with the 2015 Paris Accord.
Administration officials say using the federal government’s purchasing power as a private sector cudgel could eliminate roughly 85% of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the federal supply chain. That’s more than twice the emissions generated from the 300,000 buildings and 600,000 vehicles the federal government owns outright, the White House said in a fact sheet.
“Requiring major federal suppliers to disclose emissions and risks strengthens our supply chain and brings us closer to reaching our net-zero emissions goals,” Brenda Mallory, chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said in a statement.
But the compliance costs are enormous. The proposed rule estimates that the federal contracting industry would incur $604 billion in implementation costs in the first year and a little more than $442 billion annually after that.
Those costs could impose a significant burden on small businesses, which may not be able to afford compliance. Instead, the businesses may pass on high-income federal contracts, leaving the sector to larger businesses that can more easily absorb the costs.
Christoph Mlinarchik, a government contracts expert and the author of three books on the subject, said small businesses could struggle under the proposal.
“Piling up compliance costs disproportionately hurts small businesses that have razor-thin profit margins and less flexibility to spread these costs across many contracts,” he said. “In contrast, giant government contractors benefit from overregulation. These barriers to entry keep out competitors and new entrants, especially small businesses and innovative technology companies that America desperately needs.”
Full post
9) Tom Basile: Climate cult meets reparations lunacy
The Washington Times, 25 November 2022
The Washington Times, 25 November 2022
Small businesses could be shut out of lucrative government contracts because of the massive compliance costs imposed under a proposed Biden administration rule that would require large federal contractors to reduce and publicly disclose their greenhouse gas emissions.
The proposed rule would make the U.S. the first national government to require major federal contractors to set climate goals in line with the 2015 Paris Accord.
Administration officials say using the federal government’s purchasing power as a private sector cudgel could eliminate roughly 85% of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the federal supply chain. That’s more than twice the emissions generated from the 300,000 buildings and 600,000 vehicles the federal government owns outright, the White House said in a fact sheet.
“Requiring major federal suppliers to disclose emissions and risks strengthens our supply chain and brings us closer to reaching our net-zero emissions goals,” Brenda Mallory, chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said in a statement.
But the compliance costs are enormous. The proposed rule estimates that the federal contracting industry would incur $604 billion in implementation costs in the first year and a little more than $442 billion annually after that.
Those costs could impose a significant burden on small businesses, which may not be able to afford compliance. Instead, the businesses may pass on high-income federal contracts, leaving the sector to larger businesses that can more easily absorb the costs.
Christoph Mlinarchik, a government contracts expert and the author of three books on the subject, said small businesses could struggle under the proposal.
“Piling up compliance costs disproportionately hurts small businesses that have razor-thin profit margins and less flexibility to spread these costs across many contracts,” he said. “In contrast, giant government contractors benefit from overregulation. These barriers to entry keep out competitors and new entrants, especially small businesses and innovative technology companies that America desperately needs.”
Full post
9) Tom Basile: Climate cult meets reparations lunacy
The Washington Times, 25 November 2022
In case you’re keeping track, last week the Biden administration did something else they said they’d never do. But succumbing to pressure from Europe is expected when abdicating American leadership. Our jet-setting climate czar, John Kerry, agreed on your behalf, at a meeting of folks who specialize in bilking America, to create what amounts to a climate reparations fund.
The fund is intended to compensate those nations in the developing world that have allegedly suffered the ill effects of global climate change because of productive Western economies. It seems that punishing success is more than a domestic political trend.
With Europe’s climate cultists now in the driver’s seat of U.S. policy, Americans will potentially be funneling money into countries known for brutality, corruption and mismanagement — all in the name of apologizing for our free-market economy and republican form of government.
The insanity of it all is plain. Government failure in the Third World is a long-standing, self-inflicted wound on humanity by phony democracies and dictators that have used essential services as weapons. They’ve intentionally withheld funding for water treatment, waste management, sewage systems, water purification, crop irrigation and other basic infrastructure needs that would improve the natural environment and human health.
Nations are responsible for their own environmental conditions that affect the health of their citizens far more than any marginal rise in temperatures could do. The Biden administration, however, is now on record saying Americans should be held liable for smog, devastating droughts, crop failures and famine in developing nations.
It’s victimization culture on steroids driven by Europe’s left-wing climate cultists. It’s a marrying of climate change fanaticism, globalization and reparations lunacy. The United States and its allies need to reject this position forcefully or it will continue to weaken the West’s ability to counter an ascendant Communist China.
Of course China, which emits some 66% more CO2 than the U.S. and Europe combined, will have no part in this scheme, again leaving U.S. taxpayers on the hook for nonsensical global policy that is anything but global. In addition, the nations where China has invested billions over the last decade that now suffer at the hands of their debt trap diplomacy and continuing deplorable conditions could now likely benefit from U.S. tax dollars, even though the CCP has enormous influence over their governments and economies.
In the vein of never letting a little common sense get in the way of climate change hysterics, President Biden will likely now try to plow billions of dollars into other nations through an alphabet soup of multilateral organizations.
Legitimizing the concept of reparations internationally in this way could also lend legitimacy to the left’s efforts to champion reparations domestically. Mainstreaming universal basic income and slavery reparations continue to be key goals of the American left. Now that the midterms are over, expect those favorite leftist social experiments to rear their ugly heads again, particularly in blue states and cities. The Biden administration’s decision to pay for alleged “climate wrongs” perpetrated by America will give domestic reparations activists political cover.
Mr. Biden’s latest capitulation will allow the climate cultists to achieve further global redistribution, but perhaps more importantly institutionalize the concept that the West has victimized nations. This flies in the face of the basic fact that Western free-market capitalism has provided more innovation, freedom and economic opportunity to more people in more places than any other system in history. Those nations and their people that became a part of that success have benefited from better health and natural environments.
Climate profiteers and their naive zealots in the activist community have driven Europe into an energy crisis that is making them vulnerable to aggressors like China and Russia and sinking their economies.
Full post
The fund is intended to compensate those nations in the developing world that have allegedly suffered the ill effects of global climate change because of productive Western economies. It seems that punishing success is more than a domestic political trend.
With Europe’s climate cultists now in the driver’s seat of U.S. policy, Americans will potentially be funneling money into countries known for brutality, corruption and mismanagement — all in the name of apologizing for our free-market economy and republican form of government.
The insanity of it all is plain. Government failure in the Third World is a long-standing, self-inflicted wound on humanity by phony democracies and dictators that have used essential services as weapons. They’ve intentionally withheld funding for water treatment, waste management, sewage systems, water purification, crop irrigation and other basic infrastructure needs that would improve the natural environment and human health.
Nations are responsible for their own environmental conditions that affect the health of their citizens far more than any marginal rise in temperatures could do. The Biden administration, however, is now on record saying Americans should be held liable for smog, devastating droughts, crop failures and famine in developing nations.
It’s victimization culture on steroids driven by Europe’s left-wing climate cultists. It’s a marrying of climate change fanaticism, globalization and reparations lunacy. The United States and its allies need to reject this position forcefully or it will continue to weaken the West’s ability to counter an ascendant Communist China.
Of course China, which emits some 66% more CO2 than the U.S. and Europe combined, will have no part in this scheme, again leaving U.S. taxpayers on the hook for nonsensical global policy that is anything but global. In addition, the nations where China has invested billions over the last decade that now suffer at the hands of their debt trap diplomacy and continuing deplorable conditions could now likely benefit from U.S. tax dollars, even though the CCP has enormous influence over their governments and economies.
In the vein of never letting a little common sense get in the way of climate change hysterics, President Biden will likely now try to plow billions of dollars into other nations through an alphabet soup of multilateral organizations.
Legitimizing the concept of reparations internationally in this way could also lend legitimacy to the left’s efforts to champion reparations domestically. Mainstreaming universal basic income and slavery reparations continue to be key goals of the American left. Now that the midterms are over, expect those favorite leftist social experiments to rear their ugly heads again, particularly in blue states and cities. The Biden administration’s decision to pay for alleged “climate wrongs” perpetrated by America will give domestic reparations activists political cover.
Mr. Biden’s latest capitulation will allow the climate cultists to achieve further global redistribution, but perhaps more importantly institutionalize the concept that the West has victimized nations. This flies in the face of the basic fact that Western free-market capitalism has provided more innovation, freedom and economic opportunity to more people in more places than any other system in history. Those nations and their people that became a part of that success have benefited from better health and natural environments.
Climate profiteers and their naive zealots in the activist community have driven Europe into an energy crisis that is making them vulnerable to aggressors like China and Russia and sinking their economies.
Full post
The London-based Net Zero Watch is a campaign group set up to highlight and discuss the serious implications of expensive and poorly considered climate change policies. The Net Zero Watch newsletter is prepared by Director Dr Benny Peiser - for more information, please visit the website at www.netzerowatch.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment