This past winter, global warming deniers busted a collective gut laughing about how snow (gasp!) in winter (double gasp!!) meant there was no global warming.  That’s right, everyone, there was snow in winter, so global warming was proven to be a hoax! Yeah, they really got all those crazy scientists with all their crazy “facts” with that one. Snow in winter. Hahahahahahahaha. Ha.

Anyway, it’s spring now, and if I were a global warming denier, I’d be vewwwwwwy quiet. Why should they be quiet?  Three reasons.

1. It turned out that this past heating season turned out warmer than normal. Today’s Washington Post reports that “heating degree days”  (“an index of fuel consumption indicating how many degrees the average temperature fell below 65 for the day”) this season are 3,622, compared to a normal of 3,711 and last season’s 3,874.  Fewer degree days, of course, mean it’s been warmer than normal this heating season. For global warming deniers, that’s a big, forehead slapping “d’oh!!!”

2. Yesterday’s high temperature at Reagan National Airport was 74 degrees, compared to a normal high of 61 degrees. Today and tomorrow, it’s supposed to be 80 degrees, or 19 degrees above normal. This past winter, we had several days where temperatures were on the order of 19 degrees below normal, and global warming deniers were claiming that was proof there was no global warming. Should they now be citing near-record warmth as proof that global warming exists? The answer is, “of course not,” because that would be just as assinine as claiming snow in winter disproved global warming. Still, it would be nice if they’d be consistent in their utter illogic.

3. Finally, we have a story which hasn’t gotten much attention on Drudge, Glenn, or Rush: “A parliamentary panel investigating allegations that scientists at one of the world’s leading climate research centers misrepresented data related to global warming announced Wednesday that it had found no evidence to support that charge.”  What’s that, you say?  What about that huge! SCANDAL!!! all the global warming deniers – our fine Attorney General, included – were talking about?  You mean it turns out that “nothing in the more than 1,000 stolen e-mail messages or in the ensuing controversy challenged the scientific consensus that ‘global warming is happening and that it is induced by human activity?'”  

But, but, but, but, but, but, but, but….GlennRushDrudgeCooch please tell us what to think, make those cognitive dissonance-causing facts go away!!! Yeah, it’s sad, but if I were a global warming denier right now, by all rights my head should have just exploded.

Thanks to Tom Whipple for the Friday “Clips.”

1. MCDONNELL TOUTS CUTTING SPENDING, REFUSING TO RAISE TAXES ON NATIONAL TV

2. MCDONNELL BLASTS STUDENT LOAN REFORM

3. THE FIRST LADY PLANTS A GARDEN

7. CUCCINELLI TO CHALLENGE NEW FUEL STANDARDS AS BASED ON ERRONEOUS EPA GLOBAL WARMING FINDINGS

8. SASLAW: TRANSPORTATION WILL GET ‘NOT ONE FARTHING’ FROM OIL DRILLING

10. VA GOP TARGETS WEBB ON HEALTH CARE VOTE

12. GOP HOPEFULS CHALLENGING NYE SQUARE OFF IN TEA PARTY DEBATE TONIGHT IN VA.BEACH….

14. VA. ABOVE AVERAGE WITH H1N1 SHOTS

20. NEW EPA MINING RULES HAVE ENVIRONMENTALISTS JUMPING FOR JOY, COAL COMPANIES WORRYING ABOUT FUTURE

29. NORTHROP GRUMMAN NARROWS CHOICES FOR ITS WASHINGTON AREA HEADQUARTERS

30. METRO TAKES A LOOK AT BUDGET IDEAS

33. STUDY OF SPACE BECOMING A VICTIM OF SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

Another great line from Perkins: “Look, if you can’t run a party you certainly can’t run a country.”

Could the ruinous (environmentally, economically, you name it) practice of “mountaintop removal” coal mining be coming to an end sooner rather than later?  Based on this, it sure looks like a possibility.

The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday announced new pollution limits that could sharply curtail “mountaintop” mining, the lucrative and controversial practice that is unique to Appalachia.

The decision, announced Thursday afternoon by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, is expected to end or significantly cut the use of “valley fills.” At these sites, mining companies fill valleys to the brim with rock and rubble left over when peaks are sheared off to reach coal seams inside.

“Minimizing the number of valley fills is a very, very key factor,” Jackson said. “You’re talking about no, or very few, valley fills that are going to meet this standard.“

Of course, without “valley fills,” it’s going to be pretty difficult to blow the top off a mountain and figure out what to do with the resulting debris. Over at Gristmill, they quote “95-year-old Ken Hechler, the former West Virginia congressman who introduced the first bill in Congress to stop mountaintop removal and strip-mining in 1971,” calling this “a great victory for the Clean Water Act and justice.”  

Maybe, but as J.W. Randolph of Appalachian Voices points out, we still need “Congress to follow the Obama administration’s lead by passing legislation that will permanently protect our homes and communities from mining waste…Change in Appalachia is now inevitable, and the time for Congress to pass this legislation is now!”

By the way, for anyone who argues about the supposed economic importance of mountaintop removal mining, I strongly recommend that they read this letter, by Justin Maxson,  president of the Mountain Association for Community Economic Development.  As Maxson points out, “coal mining jobs amount to only about 2 percent of employment in the central Appalachian region; the percentage is only slightly higher if you consider related employment.”  The problem with “mountaintop removal” mining, of course, is that it’s a highly capital-intensive (explosives, heavy machinery), not labor-intensive (miners) process. The other problem is the nature of the coal industry, which Jim Webb explains extremely well in Born Fighting.

The people from the outside showed up [in Appalachian coal country] with complicated contracts…asking for “rights” to mineral deposits they could not see, and soon they were treated to a sundering of their own earth as the mining companies ripped apart their way of life, so that after a time the only option was to go down into the hole and bring the Man his coal, or starve. The Man got his coal, and the profits it brought when he shipped it out. They got their wages, black lung, and the desecration of their land…Coal made this part of Appalachia a poverty-stricken basket case while the rest of the mountain region remained mired in isolation.

That pretty much sums it up.

I have some serious questions about the fiscal responsibility of some of the steps being taken. I don’t think cuts to education and the health care safety net are a good idea ever, particularly in this economy. I don’t want to roll back protections for employees in terms of discrimination or send a signal that we don’t care about it. And I think the notion of well, we’re gonna…push back on a health care bill that will do a lot of good for hundreds of thousands of Virginians, it’s like, you just gotta go out and see how people are living and you’ll realize that this bill’s a very good thing.

For more, see here (interview by Adam Rhew).

The following statement is from Environment Virginia. See in particular Sen. Donald McEachin’s statement (after the “flip”) that he is “frustrated and dismayed” by Ken Cuccinelli’s “ludicrous lawsuits that waste time and money.” That includes, apparently, yet another lawsuit, this time against higher fuel economy standards for automobiles. As Sen. McEachin points out, Cuccinelli is focusing on these time-and-money-wasting lawsuits, “[r]ather than protect Virginians from internet predators, consumer fraud and identity theft.”

White House Shows Leadership on Clean Cars

Congress Urged to Protect New Standards by Rejecting Efforts to Weaken Clean Air Act

Richmond – In a huge win for Virginia’s environment, public health and national security, the Obama administration today announced new standards for automobile fuel economy and global warming emissions. An Environment Virginia analysis found that these new federal standards – based on the “clean cars program” developed by California and adopted by 13 other states – will save Virginians 324 million gallons of gasoline by 2016 as compared to the previous federal standards, while reducing emissions of global warming pollutants and providing a net economic savings to consumers.

“Thanks to President Obama’s leadership, the cars of tomorrow will be cleaner and cost less to fuel than the cars of today,” said Environment Virginia Advocate J.R. Tolbert. “Today’s announcement is the direction that America should be taking when addressing our energy needs. Rather than drilling off our coastlines we should prioritize conservation and renewable energy when meeting the nation’s energy needs.”

The rest of the statement is after the “flip”

In addition to the significant expected gasoline savings, the new standards will also mean a reduction in global warming pollution in Virginia equivalent to eliminating the pollution from 598,000 of today’s cars for a year, as compared with the previous federal standards.

Environment Virginia was joined by State Senator Donald McEachin in applauding today’s announcement. In response to the news that AG Cuccinelli is considering filing yet another lawsuit, Senator McEachin said, “I continue to be frustrated and dismayed by the Attorney General’s actions. Rather than protect Virginians from internet predators, consumer fraud and identity theft, he insists on filing ludicrous lawsuits that waste time and money. Moreover, these EPA regulations will save Virginians almost $100 million dollars by reducing vehicular gas use. This does not even speak of the improvements to our quality of life by reducing pollution which will improve our air and make it easier to breathe for the many Virginians, particularly our children and our seniors, with asthma, lung disease or other breathing issues.”

* *

While Virginia has failed to enact clean car standards, the push for cleaner cars has been happening for decades. In the late 1960s, state officials in California responded to horrific air pollution in cities like Los Angeles by adopting the first-ever tailpipe emission standards for cars. This paved the way for federal adoption of vehicle standards in the Clean Air Act, though the Act allowed California to continue setting its own, tougher emission standards for cars, and enabled other states to adopt these standards.

In 2002, California enacted legislation designed to reduce global warming pollution from automobiles. This resulted in rules to reduce global warming pollution from new cars and light trucks by 30 percent by 2016 compared with 2002 levels – a step that would result in improved vehicle fuel economy.

Frustrated with federal inaction to address automobile emissions and fuel economy, 13 states – Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington – soon moved to adopt the program.

Automakers and auto dealers, who opposed the program at the state level, challenged the program in court, while the Bush administration Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) delayed a decision on whether to grant the waiver needed under the Clean Air Act for California and other states to implement the standards. Following the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA that the agency possessed the authority to regulate global warming pollution, and two years after California’s initial request, the Bush administration EPA finally denied the waiver in December 2007.

As one of his first acts in office, President Obama instructed the EPA to reconsider California’s waiver request, which later resulted in EPA granting the waiver. In May, the Obama administration announced an agreement with the automakers and the state of California that enabled the creation of a single, national fuel economy/global warming emissions program for cars based on the California standards. The just-announced standards are the result of that effort.

The new standards are expected to reduce gasoline consumption by as much as 11.6 billion gallons per year in 2016 nationally-nearly as much as is consumed by all the vehicles in Texas in a year-and save consumers up to $31.8 billion annually at the pump in 2016. The new standard will also reduce global warming pollution from vehicles by 108 million metric tons per year in 2016, or as much global warming pollution as is produced by 28 500-MW coal-fired power plants.

Despite the agreement between the Obama administration, automakers and California – and the fact that 80 percent of the public approves of stronger fuel economy standards for vehicles – the clean cars program still faces attacks. Senator Lisa Murkowski’s Dirty Air Act (S.J.Res. 26), for example, would effectively veto EPA’s scientific finding that global warming pollutants threaten human health and the environment – thereby blocking the standards. The companion resolution in the House – introduced by three separate sets of members, including the Republican leadership (H.J.Res. 77), Democrats Ike Skelton (MO) and Collin Peterson (MN; H.J.R. 76), and Republicans Jerry Moran (KS) and Marsha Blackburn (TN; H.J.Res. 66) – and three additional House bills (H.R. 391, H.R. 4396, H.R. 4572) also would block the clean cars program and otherwise undermine the Clean Air Act.

“Weakening the Clean Air Act would be one of the worst moves Congress could make for Virginia’s environment,” said Tolbert. “We urge Virginia’s U.S. Representatives and Senators to let the country reap the benefits of these clean car standards by opposing any and all efforts to weaken the Clean Air Act.”