I am a leader in the fight against the national energy tax proposal some Congressional leaders are advocating. I call this bad idea 'cap-and-tax' because of the damage it will do to jobs, manufacturing and our economy.
Of all the climatologists whose careers depend on the climate changing to keep themselves publishing articles — yes, I could read that, but I don't believe it.
Cap and trade is a sledge hammer to freedom.
A Labor prime minister, Julia Gillard, who does believe in climate change, nevertheless advised her predecessor, Kevin Rudd, to abandon his emissions trading scheme.
[Hillary Clinton'] transition director being Ken Salazar, I think, indicates that she will continue to be a friend to fracking. It's not possible to solve the climate crisis while we continue to expand fracking.
The U.K.'s climate change act was passed by a majority of 463 votes to three. That is really quite extraordinary. The will of parliament has rarely been expressed so strongly and unambiguously.
The danger is that the compromises and special interests inherent in Kyoto-style targets and cap-and-trade will be accepted because of bureaucratic momentum.
Our climate is changing. And while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result of it, the risk that it may be - given the devastation it is wreaking - should be enough to compel all elected leaders to take immediate action.
I am not surprised Cameron says he supports what Gillard is doing in Australia because we have, in the U.K., a totally misconceived climate change plan as well.
Our military leaders have studied the climate change issue and now believe that mitigating climate change is an urgent national security issue.
I think we're taking a snapshot view of climate change and trying to implement policy based on that snapshot.
Obama issued a slew of executive orders about climate change during the eight years of his presidency. Inexplicably, President Trump revoked about half of them but left the other half in place. Since Obama's orders were intertwined, it's unclear exactly what applies.
The EPA's climate change regulations are based on compromised scientific reports and heavily flawed data.
It is unlikely that you'll have anything emerge from MEF (Major Economies Forum) by way of detailed programmatic specificity.
It is even possible that desirable redistribution is more likely to occur through climate change policy than otherwise, or to be accomplished more effectively through climate policy than through direct foreign aid.
