Source; SNGLR
Last year, left-wing/democrat Chicago Mayor brandon johnson sued Hyundai and Kia based on the absurd allegation that the vehicles they make are too easy to steal. Now, Johnson has set his sights on Big Oil, claiming that British Petroleum, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil, Phillips 66, Shell, and the American Petroleum Institute deceived “Chicago consumers about the climate dangers associated with their products.”
What can Chicago point to as identifiable harm from “man-made climate change?” Nothing! Lake Michigan has no clear trend of rising or falling due to climate change, rather for a few years it’s up and a few years it’s down, its levels varying as they have throughout history. Flooding hasn’t increased in frequency or severity. Nor have heat waves or droughts increased in the region. And cold spells and heavy snow have declined a bit, meaning fewer people are dying from non-optimum temperatures. Crop production in Illinois has improved amid modest warming, thanks in part to CO2 fertilization and a decline in late season frosts
So where is the climate harm? None can be identified.
Chicago and its residents rely on and benefit daily from the product the 6 oil companies they are suing provide—where is the fairness, justice, or sanity in that. The lawsuit is hypocrisy at its worst. Oil and gas are not addictive. Big Oil didn’t get anyone hooked, and Big Oil can’t know what science can’t, in fact, show that CO2 emissions are causing catastrophe in Chicago. Even if they were, it would be the users of the product, not those who produce it, who are to blame for the emissions and, thus, any attendant harm.
“We must weigh this positive: our industrial revolution and the development of our modern world has literally been fueled by oil and coal. Without those fuels, virtually all of our monumental progress would have been impossible. Having reaped the benefit of that historic progress, would it really be fair to now ignore our own responsibility in the use of fossil fuels and place the blame for global warming on those who supplied what we demanded?” -- Judge William Alsup, of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in a lawsuit brought by the cities of Oakland and San Francisco that argued 5 oil companies should be held liable for harms allegedly caused by climate change.
How much money will Chicago spend on this lawsuit, which may or may not succeed, that could have been better spent on improving average Chicagoan’s lives; on the city’s poorly maintained infrastructure, its failing schools and public hospitals, and funding new officers and programs to reduce crime? And, how much money will oil and gas companies expend in fighting this lawsuit and others filed previously that might have been better spent developing cleaner technologies and fuels or simply providing the energy we use now at a cheaper price by increasing investment in new production?
Big oil and all the ancillary companies in the industry have powered America’s and, yes, Chicago’s progress. This authoritarian lawfare does nothing productive other than lining the pockets of left-wing/democrat lawyers and furthering the political ambitions of green virtue signaling politicians who don’t live the low-carbon lifestyles they are forcing on others.
Globally, the number of managed honeybee colonies has been steadily increasing over the past several decades. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the united nations (FAO), the estimated number of colonies worldwide climbed by 46% between 1990 and 2021. That is a phenomenal increase and makes us wonder how we’ve been fooled into thinking otherwise.
Between 1990 and 2021 bee populations increased by:
• Europe, 11% ;
• North and South America, 20%;
• Africa, 38%;
• Oceania, 90%;
• Asia, 95%.
Part of the reason for the increase is the CO2-induced global greening that is benefiting forests and pollen-producing plants which honeybees depend upon for food. 1 study referenced in Jayaraj’s article pointed out that forest cover within 2 kilometers of a bee population benefits bee colonies by increasing nesting habitat.
Climate Realism has posted hundreds of articles refuting claims that various types of extreme weather events are occurring more frequently or that when they do strike, they are more severe, often citing data and language contained in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most recent Sixth Assessment Report.
"[left-wing] People are going absolutely nuts these days about extreme weather. Every event, anywhere, is now readily associated with climate change and a portent of a climate out of control, apocalyptic even. I’ve long given up hope that the actual science of climate and extreme weather will be fairly reported or discussed in policy—nowadays, climate change is just too seductive and politically expedient."--Roger Pielke, Jr., Ph.D.
1. "Greening acceleration occurred in 55.15% of the globe (a positive trend and positive growth rate trend), while browning acceleration occurred in only 7.28% (a negative trend and positive growth rate trend). Combined with meteorological variables, we found that CO2 change dominated the LAI trend, while climate change largely determined the LAI growth rate trend. Importantly, our study highlighted that drought trend did not necessarily trigger vegetation browning, but slowed down the rate of greening."
Replies