RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/12/29/biden-dept-of-energy-continues-war-on-consumers-new-fridge-freezer-and-fans-regulations-enacted/

We all know the routine. Water-saving toilets that don’t flush (flush twice), water/energy-saving dishwashers and clothes washers that don’t clean (run two cycles), lightbulbs that don’t light, dryers that don’t dry (run twice), and all the ancillary nonsense that comes from the intervention of the regulatory state.

What Biden and the progressive movement call the “green new deal” effort toward “sustainability,” including the ban on gas stoves and internal combustion engines, simply results in a diminished quality of life, a loss in lifestyle productivity, and the exact opposite outcome from their expressed/intended purpose.  It’s an abject mess of stupidity, pushed under the guise of environmentalism.

Today the Biden Dept of Energy (DOE) takes it one step further with rules and regulations on fridges, freezers and fans. {DOE LINK}

Residential Refrigerators and Freezers – The efficiency standards being adopted today for residential refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, which have not been updated in over a decade, align with recommendations from a diverse set of stakeholders, including manufacturers, the manufacturing trade association, energy, environmental, and consumer advocacy groups, states, and utilities. Compliance will be required either January 31, 2029, or January 31, 2030, depending on the configuration of the refrigerator or freezer. The energy savings over 30 years of shipments is 5.6 quadrillion British thermal units, which represents a savings of 11% relative to the energy use of products currently on the market. DOE estimates that the standards would save consumers $36.4 billion over 30 years of shipments and result in cumulative emission reductions of nearly 101 million metric tons of carbon dioxide—an amount roughly equivalent to the combined annual emissions of 12.7 million homes. 

https://pjmedia.com/miltharris/2023/12/27/a-new-kind-of-knot-head-ecosexual-woman-falls-in-love-with-an-oak-tree-n4925056

May–December relationships can be tough. In case you’re not familiar with the concept, it’s a term for a romantic relationship between two people with a considerable age difference. Many experts believe that these types of relationships can be especially difficult. Between societal pressures and different milestones, two individuals from differing decades might just have to try a little harder to make a relationship work for the long haul.

Sonja Semyonova, a 45-year-old woman from Vancouver Island, British Columbia, has found herself in one of these relationships, though hers is slightly more complicated. The one she is attracted to could be up to 55 years older than her. We can’t be sure, of course, because the only way to tell with any degree of accuracy would be to cut the one she loves in half and count the rings. You see, Semyonova identifies as ecosexual, and her beau is an oak tree. 

Isn’t it ironic that the same people who think folks who believe in two sexes are strange condone what people like Semyonova embrace? Rational thought eludes them.

Semyonova describes her relationship as erotic. While she has always felt lonely, the oak tree has filled that void. I should mention that Semyonova claims to be a self-intimacy guide, whatever that is. I shudder to think what she sets her clients up with, especially since she claims that what she feels for the tree is what she has always wanted in a person.

QUOTE: https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/12/24/al-gore-without-climate-action-we-could-lose-our-capacity-for-self-governance/#disqus_thread

Gore said, ‘The scientist who has warned us of these mega-storms and the floods and mudslides and droughts and the ice melting and the sea level rising and the storms getting stronger and the tropical diseases and climate and migrants crossing international borders in large numbers. They were dead right when they warned us about this, and so we need to pay more attention to them now.’

He continued, ‘Here is one thing they say: if we don’t take action, there could be as many as 1 billion climate refugees crossing international borders in the next several decades. Well, a few million have contributed to this wave of populist authoritarianism and dictatorships and so forth. What would a billion do? We can’t do this. We could lose our capacity for self-governance.’

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20222/global-warming-oil

[H]istory shows that civilizations based on recycling and no growth end up disappearing, the most glaring example being ancient Sumer.

Nuclear energy may sound attractive…. But the fact is that we still know little about its impact in the long run, especially when it comes to disposing of the waste it produces.

Since the Paris Conference of 2015, those leading the “save the planet” crusade have opted for a piecemeal approach to a problem that, if it exists, cannot be solved by diplomatic gimmicks, fixing sectorial targets such as a maximum of 2 degrees increase in global warming by an arbitrary date…

Even before it started, it was evident that the COP28 jamboree to “save the planet” would not satisfy the high expectations, some of them contradictory, of the 198 nations and dozens of non-governmental organizations attending the event with different agendas, including some hidden ones.

It is, therefore no surprise that some participants pronounced the event “a big failure” even before the conference president, the UAE’s Sheikh Sultan Ahmed al-Jaber, struck the final gavel.

The next move was to blame “the Arabs” and the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) as a whole.

The fact, however, is that OPEC as a whole accounts for just over a third of global oil production.

Of the top oil producers, only two Saudi Arabia and Iraq are Arab states. The United States, Russia and Canada claim first, third and fourth slots as largest producers. Of the top 20 consumers of crude, oil only two, Indonesia and Iran, are OPEC members.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-green-churchs-dubai-synod/

The last two weeks the international climate-change hustlers met in Dubai for the UN’s COP 28 annual conclave that features apocalyptic prophecies, pie-in-the-sky policies, incontinent virtue-signaling, and international grifting.

Don’t expect this CO2-spewing confab to be any more useful than the last 27 COPs. It is, however, like them replete with shameless hypocrisy and embarrassing contradictions. The 400,000 attendees included a record-setting 97,000 “official delegates,” who mostly hectored hoi polloi for their selfish addiction to fossil fuels, and morally preen themselves for their own saintly concern about anthropogenic, catastrophic global warming, the harbinger of capitalism’s end times. Even more unseemly, the attendees likely set a record for CO2 emissions, surpassing Glasgow’s 103,500 tons set in 2021. According to the Daily Mail, this is “roughly what 8,000 Brits produce in a year.”

The embarrassment came from some remarks made by this year’s President, Dr. Sultan Al-Jaber, the UAE’s environment minister and CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC). Repeating what climate “deniers”––the Orwellian word for real scientists–– have been saying for years, Al-Jaber last month commented on the Paris Accord’s’ goal to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2030: “‘There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5,’ Al-Jaber said at an online event on Nov. 21, “adding a pointed barb to the hosts that it would be impossible to stop burning fossil fuels and sustain economic development, ‘unless you want to take the world back into caves.’”

The warmist faithful, already disgruntled that the CEO of an oil company is presiding over their congregation, were further incensed that earlier ADNOC, as reported by the BBC, had announced that it “may drill 42% more by 2030, according to analysts considered the international gold standard in oil market intelligence,” and  “had already clearly stated plans to boost its production capacity by 7% over the next four years.”

Such heresy at the green synod, of course, drew a rebuke from the UN’s high priest, Secretary-General António Guterres. “The 1.5C limit is only possible if we ultimately stop burning all fossil fuels,” Guterres said. “Not reduce, not abate. Phase out, with a clear timeframe . . . . The science is clear.”

Here we have the tell that exposes the weakness of the “climate change” hypothesis. So does the phrase itself, which replaced “global warming” after the “pause” in temperature increases a few decades ago complicated the simplistic claim that large increases of anthropogenic atmospheric CO2, as had occurred during the same period, automatically raised global temperatures. In fact, the science is not “clear,” nor is it “settled,” another go-to warmist cliché that has fallen victim to more recent challenges like theoretical physicist Steven Koonin’s 2021 Unsettled.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/comment/2023/12/12/cop28-climate-conference-dubai-fossil-fuel-emissions/

As the COP 28 climate shindig comes to a merciful end, history is truly unfolding, as Marx once remarked, as farce. The perfect image of the conference in oil-rich United Arab Emirates will always be the fate of the elite jets, caught out in a snowstorm while held at Munich. Of course, activist scientists now tell us that a predicted wave of big snows, just like the lack of snow, are true signs of the imminent climate crisis.

Such ideas will no doubt be embraced by the always entertaining media and academic clowns, along with neo-feudalists like King Charles and John Kerry who have no doubt embraced COP’s session on “responsible yachting”. Of course, we can expect to be treated to the usual predictions of utter disaster if we somehow do not eliminate fossil fuels entirely post haste. 

The focus on the long-term consequences of climate change largely ignores three critical, and more immediate, challenges that will also create a hellish world: shifts in global geopolitics, rising inequality throughout the west, and finally a call for the imposition of green restructuring from the commanding heights of the bureaucracy.

Climate policies, notably attempts to wipe out fossil fuels, have already placed oil autocracies like Russia and Iran at a growing advantage. Meanwhile, the coal-dependent Middle Kingdom China has expanded its market share in manufactured exports to roughly equal the US, Germany and Japan combined.

China, which now emits more greenhouse gases than the rest of the high-income world, is not alone in embracing fossil fuels. Russia, Iran, India and a host of developing countries are increasingly open about expanding the use of fossil fuels,  including coal. Rather than leaving due to the climate crisis, people who run developing countries know their people are leaving mostly to escape poverty. As a result, these nations are more concerned with getting rich than begging for handouts from the plutocrats and bureaucrats of the West.

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/12/15/how-far-will-the-climate-cult-go/

The answer to the question in our headline is: All the way to full tyranny. Don’t think so? Take a look at where the warming alarmists have already gone.

Carbon passports are catching among the climate clergy. “Personal carbon allowances could help curb carbon emissions and lower travel’s overall footprint. These allowances will manifest as passports that force people to ration their carbon in line with the global carbon budget,” says a report from a ​​small group adventure travel company. “By 2040, we can expect to see limitations imposed on the amount of travel that is permitted each year.” CNN reports that “several laws and restrictions have been put in place over the past year that suggest our travel habits may already be on the verge of change.”
In Great Britain, “property owners who fail to comply with new energy rules could face jail time as the government pushes ahead with net zero measures,” according to media reports.
Ann Carlson, the White House’s acting National Highway Traffic Safety Administration administrator, “has long stressed the need to force Americans to live climate-friendly lives,” according to the Washington Free Beacon. While an academic at UCLA, she insisted the federal government is duty-bound to “induce behavioral change” by enacting policies that “make the bad behavior more expensive.” She has also said we “could benefit from a simpler life” but doesn’t believe “most people will engage in dramatic behavioral change” unless they are “forced” to. 
Meat will be off the menu if the climatistas get their way.
United Nations researchers recently told the Guardian “that scientists should be given the right to make policy prescriptions and, potentially, to oversee their implementation by the 195 states signed up to the U.N. framework convention on climate change.” Journalist Alex Newman – correctly – says doing so “would undermine self-governance while ushering in an ‘insane’ totalitarian technocratic form of government.”