Land And Water U.S.A.




Saturday, April 22, 2017

SOLAR OVENS AND SUSTAINED POVERTY FOR AFRICA

Steven Lyazi 
"African families and hospitals cannot rely on limited solar power, instead of electricity."

By Steven Lyazi

Solar technology in Africa, including my country of Uganda, would bring good news to millions of people who today must use firewood, charcoal and dung for cooking. Millions of Africans die from lung infections caused by breathing fumes from these fires, millions more from eating spoiled food, drinking contaminated water and having spoiled medicines, because we don’t have electricity, sanitation or refrigeration. What we do have in abundance is extensive, sustained poverty.
Solar technologies could help Africa, because this multi-purpose energy can cook food, light homes, charge cell phones and even power tiny refrigerators. Even simple solar ovens can help reduce our deadly traditional ways of cooking. Renewable energy from wind turbines can deliver even more electricity to billions around the world who still don’t have this amazing, essential energy.
Those are huge benefits, and I applaud them. In addition, we can install little wind and solar systems faster than we can build big power plants and transmission lines to remote areas.
However, we must not look at wind and solar as anything more than short-term solutions to fix serious, immediate problems. They do not equal real economic development or really improved living standards. Our cities need abundant, reliable electricity, and for faraway villages wind and solar must be only temporary, to meet basic needs until they can be connected to transmission lines and a grid.
Only in that way can we have modern homes, heating, lighting, cooking, refrigeration, offices, factories, schools, shops and hospitals – so that we can enjoy the same living standards people in industrialized countries do (and think is their right). We deserve the same rights and lives.
That is why I react strongly to people and organizations that think wind and solar electricity and solar ovens should be enough, or the end of our progress, and everyone should be happy that their lives have improved a little. I do not accept that. But I see it all the time.
At least a dozen companies are selling solar ovens and other solar technologies in Uganda. There’s Blazing Tube Solar from Hawaii and Home Energy Africa, which sells Dutch products. Green Energy Africa is registered in Kenya. It says its renewable energy systems “provide electricity without depleting the earth’s limited resources.” (Of course, those systems generate very limited electricity and require raw materials that are limited in quantity and must be dug out of the earth and turned into products using fossil fuels. But we’re not supposed to think about that.)
There’s also Solar point Uganda Limited, Energy Made in Uganda, New Age Solar Technologies Ltd, New Sun Limited, Solar Assembly Plant for African Villages, and other companies.
Some just want to make money, and leave. Others plan to stay for years. They can help solve some of our electricity, cooking and indoor air pollution problems. But these are all just short-term solutions. We need real energy, real electricity – a lot of it, reliable and affordable. What we are offered is very different.
I watched a Blazing Tube Solar demonstration and asked some questions. Their system has a long shiny metal trough that holds a tube filled with vegetable oil. The hot oil heats up a small oven at the top, to bake bread and cook other food. It has handles and wheels, so it can be moved easily. The cooker is mostly metal, so it should last a long time. But it can take 45 minutes to boil some eggs, and it costs $260.
Most African village families live on a couple dollars a day and can hardly afford food for their children. They cannot afford $260, or even $100 for some other systems. So they watch the sales presentations and admire the cookers. But they are frustrated or angry that they cannot afford them. I saw this when I traveled to the northern, eastern and central parts of Uganda.
Another problem is the sunlight. Even in Uganda, which is on the equator, the best sun comes from October through February. Other times of the year, it’s not as good because of clouds and rains. So the solar companies mostly come around when the sun is best and their ovens perform the best.
When it’s cloudy for several days, families cannot cook at all, unless they have solar cookers that actually run on electricity from photovoltaic panels on their homes. But those systems are even more expensive, and the battery power only lasts a couple days. Then families have to go back to wood, charcoal and dung. (Small diesel generators would be a huge improvement, but they too are unaffordable for most.)
Parents are very aware of the deadly respiratory diseases. But they have no choice. And many just prefer the cheaper traditional means of cooking and surviving than the fancy, expensive solar innovations.
A major local preacher for solar energy stoves is a Ugandan native who now resides in Chicago, Mr. Ron Mutebi. He used part of the $100,000 he won at the African Diaspora Marketplace competition at an Africa Infrastructure Conference in Washington. The conference was sponsored by the Corporate Council on Africa, Western Union, USAID and President Obama’s Forum with Young African Leaders. Mr. Obama often said Africans should use wind, solar and biofuel energy instead of fossil fuels.
But I worry that Mr. Mutebi has forgotten how many people are starving, have no money, try to earn a living by digging metal ores with their hands, and almost have to feed their children with grass and dirt. Uganda’s New Vision newspaper recently reported that over 10 million Ugandans in seven districts are starving and many animals are dying of hunger. This sustained poverty and starvation cannot continue.
Many people also don’t know that Africa has some big dreams. One is a Trans East Africa railway that will link Uganda, South Sudan, Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda and Horn of Africa countries. This will be a first of its kind electric railway, some 750 kilometers (466 miles) long, and it will need tremendous amounts of energy that cannot come from wind turbines and solar panels.
It will have to come from nuclear power plants – or coal or natural gas generating plants. Africa has these resources in great abundance. But so far we are barely developing or using them, except maybe to export oil to wealthy nations. We should use them. Right now, most of our natural gas from oil fields is just burned and wasted right there. Why not build gas pipelines to power plants to generate electricity for millions? Why not build nuclear and coal plants, and hydroelectric projects like the Bujagali and Karuma Dams on the Nile River in Uganda? Mostly because powerful environmentalist groups oppose these projects. They care more about plants, animals and their own power, than about African people.
What is an extra degree, or even two degrees, of warming in places like Africa? It’s already incredibly hot here, and people are used to it. What we Africans worry about and need to fix are malnutrition and starvation, the absence of electricity, and killer diseases like malaria, tuberculosis, sleeping sickness and HIV/AIDS. Climate changes and droughts have been part of our history forever, and modern energy and technology would help us cope with them better in the future. We must stop focusing on climate change.
African governments are not doing enough to build the energy, transportation and communication systems we desperately need. They are not standing up to Europeans, global banks or environmentalists who oppose big power plants in Africa. They need to do better at helping their people.
Our leaders also need to remember that Europe and the United States did not have a World Bank or other outside help when they modernized and industrialized. They did it themselves. National and local governments, groups of citizens and businesses, and various banks and investors did it. They invented things, financed big projects, and built their cities and countries. China and India have figured this out.
Now Africa needs to do the same thing – and stop relying on outsiders, bowing to their demands, and letting them dictate our future. We have the energy and other natural resources, and the smart, talented, hardworking people to get the job done. We just need to be set free to do it.
Steven Lyazi is a student and worker in Kampala, Uganda. He served as special assistant to Congress of Racial Equality-Uganda director Cyril Boynes, until Mr. Boynes’ death in January 2015. He plans to attend college and help his country and Africa get the energy and living standards they need and deserve.

Thursday, April 20, 2017

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS!

Know Your Rights!
Don't let ANYONE bully you!
Is someone trying to co-op your image? Tromping around trespassing on your property? Pretending your property is theirs by using it in their brochures? Is a government employee trying to bully you into letting them on your property? Do you know that NO ONE and NO AGENCY, STATE OR FEDERAL, is above the law?
Protect your property in 3 easy steps! 

1) Insist each person who wants access to your property fill out and sign a 
Private Property Admittance Agreement. Property Admittance Agreement.

2) Ask, "Are you a government employee?" If they answer "Yes," they must fill out and sign a Public Servants Questionnaire. 
Public Servants Questionnaire.


3) If you suspect someone is using your property without your permission, send them a Demand to Remove Property References. Places you might see references to your property include: Maps with conservation easements and land trusts, corridors for sage grouse-wildland-scenic byway-wolves-bighorn sheep-buffalo-monument-highway-drug running-feral horses-illegal immigrants-drones-historical trail and more. Look for materials that claim to co-manage, or have a vision for your property. Find addresses for "individuals" behind the materials, then send (notarized and certified) each - as an individual - a Demand to Remove Property References. (see below)

If you have any questions, please, do not hesitate to email LAWUSA@q.com or call (970) 284-6874
Tips: When someone comes on your property, get the vehicle license plate number and photograph each individual (as best as possible for identification), including Federal Agents! This makes any trespassing case stronger as to who was there and who was riding with the Federal Agency representative whether they are additional agency representatives or from a Non-Government Organization (NGO), including The Nature Conservancy ( TNC), Center for Biological Diversity, interested public, Audubon Society, Sierra Club, Ducks Unlimited or any land trust, etc.
Try to record everything they say and do in video and audio format. DO NOT TURN ANYTHING OFF NOT EVEN IF THEY "ORDER" OR "DEMAND" IT GETS SHUT OFF! If they attempt forcible action to remove your camera, it becomes not only a First Amendment Right violation, it turns rapidly into an assault and battery case!
DEMAND NOTICE TO REMOVE PROPERTY REFERENCES
Attention: ______________________________________
From: _________________________________________
I, the undersigned, am a Private Property Owner (Hereafter referred as Owner) whose properties may include deeded land, grazing allotments, certain permits, trademarks and agreements, animals, water shares, rights of way, easements, cattle trailways, gas oil and mineral rights, water/forage and other beneficial uses deemed legal, titled structures, airspace and business (Hereafter referred as Properties) located in the county(s) of _________________ in the state of ______________________.
It has been brought to my attention that through voiced intentions, public media, videos, maps, photos, prospectus, FOIA and other certain papers (Hereafter referred as Reports), __________________________________ - potentially in conjunction with non-profit and for-profit affiliate organizations, and/or representatives (Hereafter referred collectively as Entity), has allegedly assumed and or is speculating use(s) for Properties, and other properties not owned by Owner but are near-by and or conjoining Properties to the extent use of could jeopardize Owner’s Properties.
Because Entity did not seek written consent or permission from Owner for admittance on and or any use what-so-ever of Properties, Owner considers Entity may have arbitrarily engaged in unlawful trespass.
Entity’s alleged Reports have already harmed Owner by creating a nuisance that is needlessly- possibly intentionally - disturbing, violating, and encumbering rightful usage, creating a financial burden, and placing a cloud on Properties.
As Owner whose Properties, income and business are now negatively impacted by Entity’s alleged Reports, I am providing this Demand to Remove Property References to serve as my formal demand: Entity must remove, erase and delete any and all references of Properties from any and all materials generated by, or utilized by Entity, potential affiliates or representatives (contracted or volunteered), within thirty (30) business days of receipt of this letter.
In keeping with my State and Federal Constitutional rights to acquire, possess and protect my Properties, I, the undersigned as Owner, hereby demand Entity file a certified letter with the clerk and assessor in each before-mentioned County(s), clearly affirming that Entity has removed any and all references of Properties from any and all Reports Entity and his or her allied organizations have, within forty (40) business days.
Owner expects Entity to confirm receipt of this Demand Notice to Remove Property References within six (6) business day’s receipt.
Should Entity choose not to comply with Owner’s Demand to Remove Property References, Owner will exercise the right to remedy (includes liens and seizures), as may be appropriate and provided by law.
Should Entity’s non-compliance result in Owner having to take action to remove Properties and Owner referencing from Entity’s Reports - starting at the expiration of the forty (40) business day period – Entity will be charged at the rate of $55.00 per hour for labor costs, and charged for all associated costs accrued including administrative and legal fees, fuel, repair and maintenance expenses, equity loss, and restoration of property to its original condition.
In this particular matter, Owner is not associated in any manner whatsoever with Entity or representatives, affiliates, and or family members of Entity.
In this particular matter, Owner has no knowledge of Entity’s specific plans or intentions. Therefore, Owner is to be held harmless and totally exempt from any liabilities whatsoever that may result, or have resulted from any representation whatsoever Entity (representatives, affiliates and or family members of Entity) may have made to any persons as pertains to Owner or Properties.
Owner demands Entity request written permission from Owner before making any future attempt to reference Properties or Owner, or set foot on Owner’s Properties. Owner reserves the right to decline said request.

Signed ______________________________________________________________ Date __________________________
Cc: Governor, County Commissioners, County Sheriff, Interested Parties


Notary Seal

WRITTEN - OCTOBER 2011

Written October 2011

OK. Been thinking about gross abuse by government employees all night.
Past two weeks, I've done nothing but help individuals directly harmed by deliberate actions by government employees. And now I'm listening to the crap Eric Holder dishes out coupled with Obama's venture capitalism forays...These individuals go on and on and on NEVER being held- as individuals - accountable.
BP cleaned up the spill and paid fines. When the private sector screws up, they PAY. When government screws up, they stick a gun in our back and demand WE PAY...MORE!!!
It's as though government employees KNOW they can walk into a bank, demand tellers - and customers empty their pockets, turn on the fire sprinklers and flood the place, yank extinguishers off the wall and lavishly spray them everywhere, riddle art work full of holes, arrest all bank employees under claims NOT of legal standing, cite the customers for patronizing the bank and having bubble gum on their shoes, leave crates of coyotes and determine the surrounding private yards good places to dump off a few thousand feral horses, set all the trees on fire, and seize all the children in the bank- declare them government property and launch into teaching them self masturbation, then shove wind turbines and solar panels through the windows, all in the name of "public good."
Can you tell I'm just a tiny bit angry?
______________________________________

Update: 4/19/17
Found out the Army Corps of Engineers allegedly has "millions" to spend on "water projects" in Colorado. And all property owners have to do to get a little bit of those dollars, is to "bank" their private property in Conservation Easements.
Now if anyone's interested in learning the facts about such, I could explain it fully; with back up from Dr. Angus McIntosh, Debbie Bacigalupi, Ramona Morrison and more.
Folks. This is the same damn formula being used to "seize" water - in particular- in states under Prior Appropriation.
The difference between 2011 and today? I'm no longer angry.
Why?
Neither my or any private property owner's anger makes a whit of difference to bureaucrats and NGO's who are either stupid, or complicit.
Plus. Since 2011, we had that little thing called the Friday the 13th of September 2013 flood, that pretty much interrupted our lives.
The challenge? Trying to help urbanites understand that our work is not exclusive only unto rural property owners. Sure, we're protecting our property today, so urbanites won't have to protect theirs tomorrow.
Everyday I hear about exotic trips people take, "learning the language, culture and customs of other countries." Never do I hear about a "trip into the country" where one learns the language, culture and customs of ranchers and farmers.
Presently, we have a General Assembly that's more concerned about giving "special rights" to illegal immigrants and vagrants, than "equal rights" to private property owners.
As I stated to a fellow farmer last night, "As far as the people I know personally in our General Assembly, there's two for sure who can't be bought off. And those who can't buy them off are making damn sure they make their lives a living hell. Nice eh?"

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

PRESIDENT TRUMP, RIP UP THE PARIS AGREEMENT

Myron Ebell is Director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Center for Energy and Environment. He provides the following background on what is happening with President Trump’s possibly wavering promise to withdraw the United States from the heavy-handed Paris climate (non)treaty. He urges Americans to watch CEI’s short new video … and sign a petition asking the President to keep his vitally important promise.
Informative talking points, articles and blog posts follow the link to the CEI video. Cal Beisner’s article is especially valuable, as it succinctly presents the most important reasons the United States and President Trump should take a seat at the head of the table, and lead the world away from this disastrous agreement – which would destroy modern industrial economies, distribute their wealth to other nations, and do virtually nothing to reduce future global warming or prevent future climate changes or extreme weather events.
Ebell says Trump Administration senior officials will meet at 1:30 this afternoon (April 17) to try to come to a consensus on what to do about keeping President Trump's campaign promise to withdraw from the Paris Climate Treaty.  It is his understanding that the meeting will probably not agree on a recommendation to President Trump, who will make the final decision in the coming weeks.  It is also his understanding that those in favor of keeping the President's campaign promise and those in favor of breaking it are fairly evenly balanced.  This is contrary to news reports that the promise-breakers are on the verge of winning.  One concern is that Energy Secretary Rick Perry appears to have gone wobbly.
This battle between the American “Deplorables” and the Washington Swamp has monumental consequences for our access to reliable, affordable energy, and thus for our future lives, livelihoods, living standards and liberties.
Today CEI launched a 45-second internet video ad urging the President to keep his promise.  The video asks viewers to sign a petition.
Please watch the video and sign the petition.
Then send the link to friends, family, colleagues and appropriate people you know in the White House and Congress.  Urge them to watch the video and to pass it along to others.
For those on Twitter, the President's handle is @realDonaldTrump.

Here are some talking points and articles about the Paris Climate Treaty:
*        President Trump campaigned on the promise to "cancel the Paris climate agreement and stop all payments of U.S. tax dollars to UN global warming programs."  The agreement is designed to transfer wealth from the United States to developing countries, and would cost trillions of dollars to implement.
*        The Paris Agreement is an unfair deal that allows countries like China and India - which have far fewer environmental protections in place than does the U.S. - to continue to increase their greenhouse gas emissions, while we take very costly steps to dramatically decrease ours.
*        The promises made by the Obama administration in entering the agreement would cost American workers hundreds of thousands of jobs, and our economy hundreds of billions of dollars - harming America's competitiveness in the global marketplace, and handing an advantage to China and other nations.
o   Because the Paris Agreement requires member countries to increase their emission reduction commitments every five years, staying in the agreement would mean even more harm to American workers, families, and the economy over time.
o   This stands in direct conflict with President Trump's plan to create 25 million new American jobs, re-establishing the United States as a global leader in manufacturing and an engine of economic growth.
*        Some argue that we should remain in the Paris Agreement to keep our "seat at the table."  However, the fundamental goal of the Paris Agreement is to drive participating nations toward emissions reductions that are mathematically incompatible with economic growth.
o   Furthermore, remaining in the agreement and reducing our Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) is inconsistent with the construct of the agreement itself.  Provisions exist only for participating nations to strengthen their commitments, not weaken them.
o   Even providing for a rescission of our current NDC, continued U.S. participation in the agreement ensures a future administration will once again put forward unattainable, economically damaging NDCs.
o   It is also unrealistic to believe that the U.S. could extract concessions regarding the development and use of fossil fuels, particularly given the negative reaction by other members at the recent G7 Energy meeting to a proposal to include reference to fossil fuels in a joint statement of the G7 nations.
*        In stark contrast to the previous administration, President Trump has made clear that his priorities include energy policies that maximize the use of America's vast untapped resources; environmental policies that focus on protecting and preserving our air, water, and wildlife; and regulatory policies that put Americans back to work, unleashing our nation's full economic potential.  The Paris Climate Treaty stands as an obstacle to each of those goals.

Sunday, April 16, 2017

REAL SCIENCE MUST GUIDE POLICY

Climate alarmists use faulty science and bald assertions to demand end to fossil fuels
Paul Driessen
All too many alarmist climate scientists have received millions in taxpayer grants over the years, relied on computer models that do not reflect real-world observations, attacked and refused to debate scientists who disagree with manmade climate cataclysm claims, refused to share their computer algorithms and raw data with reviewers outside their circle of fellow researchers – and then used their work to make or justify demands that the world eliminate the fossil fuels that provide 80% of our energy and have lifted billions out of nasty, brutish, life-shortening poverty and disease. 
A recent US House of Representatives Science Committee hearing on assumptions, policy implications and scientific principles of climate change showcased this. Testimony by climate scientists Drs. John ChristyJudith Curry and Roger Pielke, Jr. contrasted sharply with that of Dr. Michael Mann.
Christy noted that Congress and the public have been getting biased analyses and conclusions that begin with and attempt to confirm the belief that human greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions drive climate change. He said government should “organize and fund credible ‘Red Teams’ that look at issues such as natural variability, the failure of climate models and the huge benefits to society from affordable energy, carbon-based and otherwise.” He demonstrated how average global temperatures predicted by dozens of models for 2015 are now off by a full half-degree Celsius (0.9 F) from what has actually been measured.
Curry discussed how she has been repeatedly vilified as an “anti-science” climate change “denier” and “disinformer.” But she focused on the role of the scientific method, especially as related to the complex forces involved in climate change – and especially when used to advise on policy and law. Real science means positing and proving a hypothesis with convincing real world evidence. Models can help, but only if they accurately reflect the total climate system and their results conform to real world observations.
Pielke discussed his own mistreatment as a “denier” and showed that there is “little scientific basis” for claims that extreme weather events (tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, droughts) have increased in recent decades due to GHG emissions. In fact, IPCC and other studies reveal that the USA and world have had “remarkable good fortune” with extreme weather in recent years, compared to the past: 23 major hurricanes hit the US East Coast 1915-1964; but only 9 in 1965-2016 – and not one since October 2005. He also offered 18 specific recommendations for improving scientific integrity in climate science.
Mann said the other three witnesses represent a “tiny minority” who stand opposed to the 97% who agree that “climate change is real, is human-caused, and is already having adverse impacts on us, our economy, and our planet.” He defended his “hockey stick” historic temperature graph, claimed climate models have been “tested vigorously and rigorously” and have “passed a number of impressive tests,” insisted that warming [of a couple hundredths of a degree] in recent years proves that manmade global warming “has continued unabated,” and accused those who contest these statements of being “anti-science” deniers.
The “97% consensus” is imaginary – a fabrication. One source was a survey sent to 10,256 scientists, of whom 3,146 responded. But their number was arbitrarily reduced to 77 “expert” or “active” climate researchers, of which 75 agreed with two simplistic questions that many would support. (Has Earth warmed since 1800? Did humans play a significant role?) Voila! 97% consensus. But what about the other 3,069 respondents? 75 out of 3,146 is barely 0.02 percent. Purported consensus studies by Cook, Oreskes and others were just as bogus.
Moreover, governments have been spending billions of dollars annually on climate research. The vas majority went to the alarmist camp. If $25,000 or $100,000 a year from fossil fuel interests can “buy” skeptical scientists, as we are often told, how much “consensus” can billions purchase? If many scientists who contest “dangerous manmade climate change” are harassed, or threatened with RICO prosecutions, how many will have the courage to speak out and challenge the “consensus” and “settled science”?
These are timely questions. On April 12, 1633 the Catholic Church convicted astronomer Galileo Galilei of heresy, for refusing to accept its doctrine that the Sun revolves around the Earth.
But far more important, the climate battle is not merely a debate over miasma versus germ theory of disease, AC versus DC current, or geologic mechanisms behind plate tectonics. It’s far more even than disagreements over how much humans might be affecting Earth’s climate, or how bad (or beneficial) future changes might be, on a planet where climate fluctuations have occurred throughout history.
Manmade climate catastrophe claims are being used to justify demands that the United States and world eliminate the carbon-based fuels that provide 80% of the energy that makes modern industry, civilization and living standards possible – and that continue to lift billions of people out of poverty and disease.
Climate alarmists want that radical transformation to take place right nowMcKinsey & Company, the UN and assorted activists say the world must spend some $93 trillion over the next 15 years to convert completely from fossil fuels to “sustainable” energy! Or it will be too late. Our planet will be doomed.
Claims and demands like those require solid, incontrovertible proof that climate alarmists are right. Not just computer models, repeated assertions, “peer review” among like-minded researchers seeking their next government grant, or a partial-degree of warming amid multiple El NiƱos and cooling cycles. They require “Red Team” analyses and open, unfettered debate over every aspect of human and natural influences on Earth’s climate, the ways carbon dioxide improves plant growth, and the need for abundant, reliable, affordable electricity and motor fuel for every person in every nation.
We haven’t had any of that so far. Up to now, climate chaos is just one more Club of Rome supposedly looming disaster, supposedly caused by human intervention in natural processes, supposedly requiring immediate, fundamental changes in human behavior, to avoid supposed global calamities – threats to the very survival of our wildlife, civilization and planet. It’s all assertions, devoid of persuasive evidence.
It’s true that virtually all nations have signed the Paris accords. However, only President Obama signed it for the USA; the Senate never ratified the decision. And the US reduced its CO2 emissions by 12.5% since 2007, while Europe’s carbon dioxide emissions rose 0.7% in one year, 2014-2015. 
Britain is looking into rescinding some 2020 clean energy targets and using more coal and natural gas. EU nations are realizing that overpriced, unreliable wind and solar power is hammering families and killing their jobs and economies. Virtually all the developing nations that signed onto the Paris (non)treaty did so because they were promised trillions of dollars in climate “adaptation, mitigation and reparation” money.
That brings us to another April anniversary: the 1815 eruption of Indonesia’s Mt. Tambora. This monumental volcanic explosion blew an inconceivable 4,650 feet off the volcano; sent 36 cubic miles of ash, rock, sulfur and other gases into the atmosphere; triggered tsunamis that killed over 10,000 people; and caused serious climate changes and crop failures that killed 80,000 more over the following year.
We may be about to witness another volcanic explosion. Under the Paris insanity, developed nations are expected to de-carbonize, de-industrialize and curb their growth – while sending $100 billion per year to ruling elites in developing countries that are not required to trim fossil fuel use or GHG emissions.
It cannot and will not happen. In fact, industrialized nations are already reneging on their pledges, refusing to contribute to the Green Climate Fund, or recasting current foreign aid as Paris climate money. China, India, Brazil and poor countries are outraged. They want new money, more money – or else they will walk away from their commitments, and the Paris house of cards will collapse. It should collapse.
Billions of people are still energy-deprived, impoverished, diseased and starving. Millions are dying needlessly every year. Faulty, authoritarian climate and “sustainability” claims are being use to perpetuate these travesties. It’s time to help poor countries get the same energy, technologies and opportunities we have – so that they can take their rightful places among Earth’s healthy and prosperous people.
Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death.

Saturday, April 8, 2017

TRUMP'S EPA REVERSAL MELTS SNOWFLAKES, RAISES "SEE" LEVELS


 
Yesterday, 11:46 AM

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

KILL BILL, THEY WERE TOLD


From: Roni Bell Sylvester
Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 1:28 PM
To: jenijamesarndt@gmail.com; diane.mitschbush.house@state.co.us; jon.becker.house@state.co.us; 'Perry Buck'; jessie.danielson.house@state.co.us; daneya.esgar.house@state.co.us; chris.hansen.house@state.co.us; steve.lebsock.house@state.co.us; hugh.mckean.house@state.co.us; lori.saine.house@state.co.us; donald.valdez.house@state.co.us; yeulin.willett.house@state.co.us; kimmi.lewis.house@state.co.us
Subject: Colorado Ag Committee, regarding: HB 17-1234

Dear Colorado House Agriculture Committee,

We appreciate your listening to the testimonies on HB 17-1234, Beef Country of Origin Retail Placard. 

Chuck Sylvester and I would like to thank Representatives Lori Saine, Perry Buck, Jon Becker, Hugh McKean, Steve Lebsock and Kimmi Lewis, for supporting HB 17-1234. 
To opposition Representatives Jessie Danielson, Daneya Esgar, Chris Hansen, Yeulin Willett, Donald Valdez, Jeni James Arndt and Diane Mitsch Bush, we offer the following:  

HB 17-1234 was a solid consumer bill, deserving to be passed out of committee. 

4/3/17: In a visit with Danny Williams, Colorado Cattlemen's Association (CCA) Lobbyist, I said, *"I'm not even sure why I'm here. Knowing CCA and National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) have likely predetermined its death, because CCA and NCBA do not represent Cow Calf Producers." 
He answered, "They represent cattlemen!"
I answered, "They do not represent Cow Calf Producers." 
He repeated, "They represent cattlemen."
Repeat until he walked off.  
Representatives, please know that you've been taught - over many years - that the NCBA et al represent ALL in the cattle industry. This is wholly inaccurate. They do NOT represent Cow-Calf Producers
4/3/17: I visited with Don Shawcroft, President of Colorado Farm Bureau (CFB), as Emily Ibach, Director of Public Policy, State Affairs listened. Basically I repeated the same adding, "Those testifying in support of HB 17-1234 are here as volunteers. Those opposing are PAID. That is their work!" 
Don answered, "The cattlemen are paid."
I answered, "Are you talking about the Cow-Calf Producers, for they are not paid," adding something along the line of, "It's just like the water situation Don. The lower end steals our water, then makes enough money off our property to retain attorneys and lobbyists to fight us, so they can make more money. The NCBA makes enough money off Cow-Calf Producers to hire attorneys and lobbyists to fight us. I would bet all the Cow-Calf Producers testifying support, are here on their own time/dime. And it's expensive! Their down time losses are likely equal (or more) to what you - and the other opposers are paid."  
CFB proved yesterday that they too, do not represent Cow-Calf Producers. 
By now you're probably asking why such as the CFB, CCA and NCBA do not support Cow-Calf Producers.  
Here are some vetted reasons we'd appreciate you to be hereon cognizant of: 
They know that Cow-Calf Producers on Federal land (aka Allotment Owners) own "valid-existing property rights" - on Federal Land. Whichever entity - China, Federal Reserve et al - Federal gets loans from, require "unencumbered colladeratization." Allotment Owners are "encumbrances" Federal must remove. Now you know "why" the breathless moves to make "wild/free/most precious jewel/last great place/energy hubs for alternative energy, climate change, species (such as sage grouse) designations,  and conservation easements." 
In addition to the before-mentioned, they and their NGO partners (including the Nature Conservancy), also have a membership web that deals in Water; for the same entities that oppose any Water bill that would return authority to Water Engineers administration in prior appropriation, also opposed the Equal Protection bill and HB 17-1234.
NCBA/USDA ought never, ever, ever bring up animal I.D. again! 

Why? 4/3/17: Opposition to the beef placard claimed: "Cost - will get sued - implementation - extra paperwork - traceability (they contradicted themselves) - and again...cost." Basically, they killed their past any future arguments for Animal I.D.

Trying to "mandate" government enforcement of animal I.D. on Cow/Calf Producers will no longer work. 

Here's why: They made the argument that having a beef placard would NOT add value! Their duplicity lies in their argument that Cow/Calf Producer I.D.'ing their animals "would" add value; but a "placard" would not?

It's my take (many agree) that the only reason NCBA has been trying to cram animal I.D. down the throats of Cow/Calf Producers, is to provide "geographical indicators" in compliance with EU and other trade alliances. Foreign markets that demand born and raised in the U.S.A. beef, want verification that the beef exported to them is in fact "born and raised in the U.S.A. In other words, Japan knows where their beef comes from, but Americans don't. And the USDA assists in the coverup! 

NCBA enjoys profits on foreign export demand, and profits on importing cheap beef to U.S. 
They think nothing of putting costs on Cow/Calf Producers, who are price receivers with marginal profits. 
Contrarily the NCBA wails and rips at its clothes over a simple placard that (for example) Chuck Sylvester alone, would be happy to buy (Vistaprint really does work.) for them. 
So yes. I repeat. I was amused by HB 17-1234 opposers claims that "placard wouldn't add value," while thinking about USDA's argument, "Yeh! Animal I.D. will "add value." Good grief. Even this non-cattle lay person spotted the duplicity.
As we already knew, yesterday's testimonies verified that the NCBA, CCA and CFB do NOT represent "Cow/Calf Producers!" 
They clearly manifested the U.S. Cattle Industry diagram Chuck Sylvester developed 11 years ago. 
Hereon, we will be urging groups including R-Calf, US Cattlemen's, RAO, Rocky Mountain Union and affiliates, to work together, and build a dynamic support team that will represent and protect "valid-existing rights" of  Cow/Calf Producers, Allotment Owners and Water rights owners. 
Thank you,

Charles W. and Ronita M. Sylvester 

PS: When the CCA went into the conservation easement business, Chuck ended his longtime membership with them. We still belong to NCBA - to do research and try building bridges, and as of now, we'll drop our CFB membership and join the Rocky Mountain Farmers Union. We'll also inform voters which representatives represent consumers, and which don't. 

Roni Bell Sylvester
(970) 284-6874

*Disclaimer: Everything in quotes is paraphrased.

Followers