Every religion needs a creed. A set of beliefs that its followers can adhere to. A flag they can rally around in good times and bad.
Recycling is fine. Conservation is fine. But sometimes greenies cross the line. They expect you and me to go jobless and hungry so they can save a porcupine.
High cost, no benefit does nothing to forestall agency’s quest for ecological utopia.
All that money. All that effort. All the sermonizing and bloodcurdling imagery and still, Americans don't seem to be evolving quickly enough on the environment.
Whom does Barack Obama want to please more -- out-of-work adults who would love a high-wage job building the Keystone XL pipeline or tony venture capitalists who travel cloistered in private jets when they're not complaining that Washington doesn't do enough about global warming?
Environmental activists and politicians would like you to think that we must love their regulations -- or hate trees and animals.
President Obama has made it clear, both in word and action, that climate-change regulation is a top priority for his second term. Putting aside the legitimate questions about the science behind climate-change alarmism, the nomination of Gina McCarthy as EPA administrator is just the latest sign that the president is determined to push a market-subverting, economy-handcuffing energy agenda on the American people.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has become increasingly notorious for overstepping its authority.
For all the Obama-era talk of decline, there is at least one reason why America probably won't, at least not quite yet.
Celebrities are now upset about fracking, the injection of chemicals into the ground to crack rocks to release oil and gas. With everyone saying they want alternatives to foreign oil, I'd think celebrities would love fracking.
To understand the environmentalists' theology you must check common sense at the door. On the surface, wind turbines seem like a great alternative to fossil fuel. But the dirty little secret is fossil fuels are used to fill in during down times.
Say you were a politician, and there was a domestic energy source available that’s clean and abundant. One that has the potential to create new jobs and revitalize local economies. Would you do more to encourage it?
Average planetary temperatures haven’t budged in 16 years. Hurricanes and strong tornadoes are at or near their lowest ebb in decades. Global sea ice is back to normal, while the Antarctic icepack continues to grow. The rate of sea level rise remains what it was in 1900.
Recently, a federal court sided with the American Petroleum Institute (API) and ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to lower its biofuel volume target.
Radical activists launch more attacks on oil sands, Keystone pipeline, jobs and revenues
In his confirmation hearing yesterday, Senator Kerry said he would commit to analyzing the ecological impacts of the Keystone Pipeline before allowing further construction.
Something’s amiss at the Department of Interior. Eight government scientists were recently fired or reassigned after voicing concerns to their superiors about faulty environmental science used for policy decisions. Which begs the question, “Are some government agencies manipulating science to advance political agendas?”
We in the media rarely lie to you. But that leaves plenty of room to take things wildly out of context. That's where most big scare stories come from, like recent headlines about GM foods. GM means "genetically modified," which means scientists add genes, altering the plant's DNA, in this case to make the crop resistant to pests.
Policy integrity. Ethical culture. Environmental protection. Environmental defense. Friends of earth. Defenders of wildlife. Not just their names, but their charter, culture and policies – their very being – represent a commitment to these profound values. Or so we are supposed to believe.
The election was more than a month ago and many in Washington and around the country are still scrambling to break out their divining rods and polish off their crystal balls. There are still many unanswered questions about the direction of President Obama’s next term, particularly how it will govern on energy policy. Will the President embrace the economic engine of energy production, or will he side with the climate change lobby and move to support a cap and trade program like the one California just put into place? Based on the campaign rhetoric of the last year, it’s hard to tell.
Ninety-six. That’s the number of 60-watt incandescent light bulbs I purchased last weekend after learning the other kind, the compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) environmentalists are so in love with, are hazardous to my health and to the environment. I would have preferred a higher wattage but discovered the 75-watt version was outlawed January 1st.
Matt Damon’s latest film “Promised Land” arrived in theaters nationwide yesterday with a focus on the controversial issue of fracking. Written by Matt Damon (who won an Oscar for co-writing “Good Will Hunting”) and John Krasinski (“The Office),” the story focuses on a small community that is asked to debate the merits of the process when a large corporation arrives in town wanting to buy much of the local land.
Al Qaeda Operative Who Nearly Bombed UK Shopping Mall, NYC Subway Sentenced to 40 Years in Prison | Katie Pavlich