Countering Earth Hour, Mismanagement at Freddie Mac and Good News for Coal
Lights go out around the world in observance of “Earth Hour”.
“Green and private conservation are fine. We have no problem with an individual (or group) that wants to sit naked in the dark without heat, clothing or light. Additionally, we’d have no problem with the group holding a pro-green technology rally. That’s their choice. But when this group stages a “global election” – enviros are asking the world’s citizenry to vote by switching off our lights with the express purpose of influencing government policies to take action against global warming – we have every right as individuals to express our vote for the opposite. If our Human Achievement Hour is at all a dig against Earth Hour, it is so only by the fact that we are pointing out what Earth Hour truly is about: It isn’t pro-Earth, it is anti-man and anti-innovation.”
Regulators push mortgage giant Freddie Mac to hide the government’s role in its finances.
“After federal regulators took over failing mortgage giant Freddie Mac, they didn’t stop its risky lending practices. Instead, they ramped up its risk-taking, making it run up even bigger debts at taxpayer expense to try to artificially pump up the economy. They made Freddie buy countless risky mortgage loans. Recently, the Obama Administration forced it to incur $30 billion in losses as part of the administration’s bailout for irresponsible mortgage borrowers, which caps mortgage payments for even high-income borrowers at a ridiculously low level. The Obama Administration tried to prevent Freddie Mac from even disclosing these losses in the financial disclosures it must make to investors under the securities laws.”
Scientists develop a new way to make inexpensive car fuel from liquefied coal.
“Now, you might think that inexpensive motor fuel is a good thing, especially in these times of financial peril, fiscal chaos, and high unemployment. In addition, since America is the “Saudi Arabia of coal,” conversion of coal to motor fuel, provided it is economical and market-driven, could enhance U.S. energy security. So why is this ‘bad news’? Because coal-derived fuel “could produce twice as much CO2 [carbon dioxide] as traditional petroleum fuels and at best will still emit at least as much of the greenhouse gas.” Consequently, what these scientists are proposing to do “is simply not allowable if we want to avoid the perils of unconstrained anthropogenic climate change,” declares Pushker Karecha of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.”
Listen to LibertyWeek, the CEI podcast, here.