As for Hillary Clinton’s plan here, well, I expect and hope she’ll improve on it when she (most probably) gets into office. As that stands and reads, I am underwhelmed and disappointed, thought she’d do better than that.

“Global Warming Is: A “Communist Red Movement” – Anti-American, Anti-Freedom, Anti-Capitalist.”

Bzzt. Wrong. Global Warming is a scientifically observed phenomenon whereby greenhouse gas emissions from human activities have caused and are causing planetary temperatures to increase due to the known physics of gas molecule -solar radiation interactivity.

The USA, communism and capitalism are essentially irrelevant to this reality these being political -economic ideologies and a nation respectively.

I don’t suppose you happen to have any evidence or logic to back up your seeming drive by trolling here do you?

It would be interesting to know how different it is from the Democratic Senator’s plan.

I’ll limit myself to three things:

I was happy to see that her plan includes working together with Canada and Mexico, and implicitly recognizes the importance of international collaboration. Also, an energy system based to a large extent on intermittent renewable sources gains from being able to draw on different locations.

It was good that her plan includes “Revitalizing Coal Communities.” Any realistic climate plan will be eliminating their previous source of sustenance, and they should be given the help they need.

What I’m not too happy about is this:

“Offer financing tools for grid investments that support the integration of distributed energy resources and for gas pipeline investments that enable households and businesses to switch away from heating oil and other petroleum products.”

Gas is a CO2 and methane emitting fossil fuel. A pipeline built today is an infrastructural commitment many years into the future. To the extent that the new pipelines are intended to carry fracked gas, I’m not convinced that the long-term supply can warrant a significant expansion of gas pipelines.

Along the same lines, her plan mentions nuclear, which has had a negative learning curve, and CCS, which isn’t feasible on a large scale.

“By the end of the century, the Earth’s climate is likely to be substantially warmer and different from today’s. A large body of scientific evidence indicates that climate change is mostly being driven by human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide (CO2) from generating power.”
Source: Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre, a department within the MOD. (UK Ministry of Defence)
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/348164/20140821_DCDC_GST_5_Web_Secured.pdf

“Climate change poses another significant challenge for the United States and the world at large. As greenhouse gas emissions increase, sea levels are rising, average global temperatures are increasing, and severe weather patterns are accelerating. These changes, coupled with other global dynamics, including growing, urbanizing, more affluent populations, and substantial economic growth in India, China, Brazil, and other nations, will devastate homes, land, and infrastructure. Climate change may exacerbate water scarcity and lead to sharp increases in food costs. The pressures caused by climate change will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world. These effects are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions – conditions that can enable terrorist activity and other forms of violence.”
Source: United States Department of Defense
archive.defense.gov/pubs/2014_Quadrennial_Defense_Review.pdf

“Projected climate change is a complex multi-decade challenge. Without action to build resilience, it will increase security risks over much of the planet. It will not only increase threats to developing nations in resource-challenged parts of the world, but it will also test the security of nations with robust capability, including significant elements of our National Power here at home.”
Source: CNA Military Advisory Board May 2014
National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change
http://biospherology.com/PDF/MAB_2014.pdf

“Among the future trends that will impact our national security is climate change. Rising global temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, climbing sea levels, and more extreme weather events will intensify the challenges of global instability, hunger, poverty, and conflict. They will likely lead to food and water shortages, pandemic disease, disputes over refugees and resources, and destruction by natural disasters in regions across the globe.
In our defense strategy, we refer to climate change as a “threat multiplier” because it has the potential to exacerbate many of the challenges we are dealing with today – from infectious disease to terrorism. We are already beginning to see some of these impacts.”
Department of Defense
2014 CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION ROADMAP
http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/CCARprint_wForeword_c.pdf

Participants in the “Communist Red Movement” include prominent capitalists and some of the world’s largest corporations.

“Thirteen of America’s best-known companies — including Apple, Google, Microsoft, Walmart and Bank of America — have pledged $140 billion toward efforts to reduce carbon emissions. The companies on Monday helped launch the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, part of an Obama administration effort to enlist private companies in the fight to slow climate change…
Other companies signing the pledge are Alcoa, Berkshire Hathaway Energy, Cargill, Coca-Cola, General Motors, Goldman Sachs, Pepsico and UPS.”
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/google-apple-microsoft-join-business-pledge-fight-climate-change-n399296

It shouldn’t be necessary to state the obvious regarding Not_Man_Made’s knowledge and intelligence.

DJ

Because allowing the destruction to our economy that will result from not taking action to mitigate global warming is just chasing short-term pennies to lose massive amounts of dollars later. That is distinctly Anti-Capitalist.

Blocking the ability of government to act to prevent such destruction to America’s economic interests is similarly Anti-Freedom.

And those who speak out against mitigation and spread denial about AGW are therefore Anti-American.

AGW: Wishing it were not so does not make it “go away”. Blocking action to mitigate it does not make your wishes come true. Denying it in print will not block action on it.

http://www.defense.gov/News-Article-View/Article/612710

Oh wait, no, you’re an idiot who won’t take the time to study the science. Never mind.

DJ