Big things are happening in the U.S. when it comes to climate change. Are Canadians about to be left in the dust? Or will we catch up? In this episode, we discuss the recent Supreme Court ruling that strikes down a key piece of climate science.
00:00:41.120So this is from about a week ago, late July.
00:00:46.960President Donald Trump's administration on Tuesday proposed revoking a scientific finding,
00:00:51.900but it wasn't a scientific finding as we'll get into it.
00:00:54.280It seems to be a court finding that has long been the central basis for U.S. action to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change.
00:01:03.620The proposed Environmental Protection Agency rule would rescind a 2009 declaration
00:01:09.220that determined that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare.
00:01:15.000The endangerment finding is the legal underpinning of a host of climate regulations under the Clean Air Act for Motor Vehicles,
00:01:24.080power plants, and other pollution sources that are heating the planet.
00:01:28.340Repealing the finding, quote, will be the largest deregulatory action in the history of America, end quote,
00:04:23.620So what we're going to see is there's going to be a lot of discussion about several things which support the retraction of the endangerment finding.
00:04:31.520But I think we have to, first of all, define what that is.
00:05:27.200This required the EPA to actually determine if greenhouse gases, and in particular, carbon dioxide, was this a threat to human health and welfare?
00:05:37.220And that was a very important question, because if it is, if they decided it is, then they have no choice but to regulate it.
00:05:44.780Now, the interesting thing, Sheila, is we have to realize that 80% of all the greenhouse gas emissions that are put out by humans, except for water vapor, in the United States and Canada is carbon dioxide.
00:05:57.380Okay, so carbon dioxide, 80% of the greenhouse gases that we're talking about.
00:06:01.620So really, the endangerment finding was asking this question.
00:06:07.700Once the court declared that carbon dioxide and these other greenhouse gases were pollutants under the Clean Air Act, they had to conduct an assessment as to whether or not it was dangerous to humanity and the environment.
00:06:30.060So they declared that, you know, greenhouse gases, in particular, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, plus three other fluorine type gases, that these were a threat, and the words were, to the population's health and welfare.
00:06:46.880And that's the foundation from which they built all of these regulations about motor vehicles, about oil and gas, about industrial processes.
00:06:56.000It's all based on the endangerment finding.
00:06:58.340Now, it's interesting that Alan Carlin, who was a chief economist at the EPA at the time, he did a really good analysis to show that there was no reason to classify carbon dioxide, in particular, as a pollutant.
00:07:11.940It was not a threat to health and welfare.
00:07:21.200But they essentially said, well, your findings, your report on this endangerment finding is not useful.
00:07:28.880It's not helpful, because we've already decided to regulate greenhouse gases, because we've already decided that they'll be harmful to human health and welfare.
00:07:39.120So, you know, Sheila, I always turn that into a bit of a joke when I give presentations.
00:07:42.920You know, we always talk about evidence-based decision-making.
00:07:45.880Well, what this was is decision-based evidence-making.
00:08:01.740So the foundation of the policies that are restricting industrial development in the United States and reducing our massively increasing our price of cars and all sorts of things, this is called the endangerment finding.
00:08:14.580So what's happening now is Lee Zeldin, who's head of the EPA in the United States.
00:08:26.040He said, we are driving a dagger through the heart of the climate change religion, you know, which I say, hooray, hooray for you.
00:08:34.880So what's happening now is they've put out a proposal to rescind the endangerment finding.
00:08:40.480And they've published lots of material.
00:08:43.080You know, this will undoubtedly be cited as well.
00:08:45.400But just a few days before that, they put out a report from what's called the Climate Working Group for the Department of Energy.
00:08:53.680And there were five scientists involved there that actually Chris Wright, who's head of the Department of Energy, he chose these people because they were, you know, obviously agreeing with President Trump, but also because they represented a spectrum of, you know, expert advice.
00:09:10.160There was Ross McKittrick from Canada, which is nice.
00:09:12.620He's actually one of the authors of this report.
00:09:15.240It's about what are the real impacts of greenhouse gas emissions when you look at government data, when you look at actual science, what's the real impact?
00:09:25.200And John Christie and what's his name?
00:09:30.960But regardless, there were five of these scientists that I'll list later.
00:09:34.280And Coonan, he was another one from New York University, Judith Curry from Georgia Institute of Technology.
00:09:39.640Oh, yeah. And the other one is Roy Spencer, because Spencer and Christie, they're the they're the duo, the dynamic duo who do all the satellite measurements.
00:09:48.780So those five scientists put together a report and they said some pretty interesting things.
00:09:53.520And the report is open now for public comment.
00:09:56.380What they said is it may be that the detriments, the negative effects of these climate mitigation policies could very well be worse than any positive benefits.
00:10:07.300They also said in the report that just came out that the impact of American plans to reduce greenhouse gases will be undetectable.
00:10:16.240It'll be undetectable on global climate.
00:10:19.500And, you know, it's interesting because these fellows in the report or I should say the and, you know, I'll send you a copy of it so you can actually put a link on.
00:10:28.640It's actually put out the Canadians for sensible climate policy have what they call the backup book, which is, in fact, including this letter.
00:10:36.120But what they said is that if we go to net zero in the developed world, it will bring about mass starvation.
00:10:43.580OK, they're they're very candid and they talk about why.
00:10:46.120And it's a very detailed report. But the bottom line is that Canadians should pay attention to this for several reasons.
00:10:52.140First of all, because over the next few months and certainly when this goes to court, because it's going to go to court, no question about it.
00:10:59.320We're going to hear a lot more from people like Richard Linson and Will Happer and Steve Kuhn and Ross McKittrick, all these people who are what I call climate realists.
00:11:07.980And so what's going to happen is the the base of the Conservative Party, when all this climate realism is coming into the media to defend the recession of the endangerment finding, many people in the Conservative Party are going to say, well, what the heck?
00:11:23.140Why are we supporting the climate scare?
00:11:25.240Because more and more, we're going to hear that the climate scare is a mistake.
00:11:37.660And in fact, it's interesting because in the DOE report and in this letter, they talk about the massive increase in crop productivity because of CO2, which, of course, is plant food.
00:11:50.640Because of the massive influx of climate realist science that we're going to hear over the next few years, many people are going to say to Pierre Polyev,
00:11:59.440well, then why the heck are you supporting the climate scare?
00:13:23.460If the Trump administration loses at the D.C. Court appeal level, you know, they're going to obviously appeal it to the Supreme Court because they want to get rid of this endangerment finding.
00:13:33.600And to understand how significant it is, the endangerment finding is responsible for a trillion dollars of regulation.
00:14:11.880This endangerment regulation was their end run around doing an unpopular carbon tax.
00:14:19.620People don't like taxes in the United States, even more so than we don't like them in Canada.
00:14:23.660And so this was their way of imposing expensive regulations that would act as a tax or levy by putting these pieces of regulation into automobile manufacturing.
00:14:37.660So this is your emission standards that make your vehicle so super expensive and actually, at the end of the day, run less efficiently.
00:14:45.160Yeah, and actually, you know, one of the benefits of getting rid of the endangerment finding is currently with these greenhouse gas regulations.
00:14:53.220It massively increases the price of a car.
00:14:56.260And this is where I think, sorry to interrupt you, I think this is where it's really going to affect Canadians.
00:15:00.140Because if we have these emission standards still in Canada and they're making vehicles in the United States without them, they're not going to want our cars.
00:15:08.300And we're already in the midst of a trade problem.
00:15:22.240Canadians should have known better than to vote for him when this was part of his platform.
00:15:26.100Under the carbon border, that mechanism I just spoke about, adjustment mechanism, any company in the United States that is not held to the same carbon dioxide reduction standards that we are in Canada, if they import into Canada, they have to pay a tariff based on the difference between what they had to produce it and what it would have cost to produce the same vehicle in Canada.
00:15:51.100And this would apply to all sorts of things, not just cars.
00:15:53.560So I'm sure Trump is going to be super annoyed when we put on this carbon border adjustment mechanism, because if they get rid of the EPA finding, it's going to be much cheaper to make all sorts of goods in the United States, to which Carney responds, then we'll tax the heck out of you to punish you for not doing this stupid carbon stuff.
00:16:14.540Yeah, I mean, and even when you look at our integrated electricity grid, particularly here in Alberta, because our friends in Saskatchewan, but also our friends in Montana and Wyoming frequently bail us out when we have threatened brownouts.
00:16:27.980So we're going to be buying electricity that is, will be created without these onerous standards that are driving up the cost of everything and what?
00:16:38.620So Carney's going to expect us to already buy this electricity at a premium and then put a lever on it?
00:17:08.340So, you know, the Conservative Party had better watch it because over the next few years, and it's going to take years to get through the courts.
00:17:14.880And of course, the concern is that it may go to the Supreme Court after Trump has left his office, which I hope doesn't happen, because if it's a Democrat government, you know, that has some sway for sure on the Supreme Court.
00:17:27.000So the hope is that all of this will be settled before the end of Trump's second term.
00:17:32.380And so it's brilliant that they're doing it right at the beginning of this term, OK, because this is a long, long process.
00:17:38.460And the environmental groups, they're going to go ballistic.
00:17:43.540And, you know, so I think in the long run, if it can be done while Trump is still president, that we will see the Supreme Court agree that, no, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.
00:18:04.000Now, you just talked about the Supreme Court hopefully siding with Trump, but we have the International Court of Justice siding against humanity, really, when they say that countries, well, they don't mean countries here.
00:18:17.220They mean the Western world, developed countries, have a legal duty to protect the climate and prevent harm from climate change.
00:18:25.720I thought they had a legal duty to protect people.
00:18:29.620Well, they're interpreting it as protecting people.
00:18:32.380But, you know, they ignored completely this letter, you know, that I held up earlier, which was sent in 2023.
00:18:39.200I mean, November 2023, they should have read it, but they didn't.
00:18:43.280But, yeah, it was a unanimous passage of this advisory, they call it.
00:18:47.840It's not binding, but it'll be used, you can be sure, by Canada and woke nations to actually back up laws that will force us to do the things they want us to do.
00:18:57.940So, yeah, it's the International Court of Justice.
00:19:00.320And this started with a group of college students in Fiji, if you can imagine that.
00:19:05.080And, yeah, they managed to get support from a whole lot of island nations.
00:19:10.080And then they got support from 150 plus countries in the General Assembly of the United Nations.
00:19:15.920And so it was passed a couple of years ago.
00:19:18.640They passed a resolution to ask the International Court of Justice to have a look at does the climate scare, does the climate crisis, as they call it, make a responsibility for developed countries to pay developing countries for the supposed damage that we're causing?
00:19:36.060And to give some sort of a perspective of what it would cost if we did what the International Court of Justice says, it turns out that the price tag for Canada would be $750 billion a year to pay for our sins.
00:19:52.940And the United States, yeah, and for the United States, it was supposed to be $5.6 trillion per year paid to developing countries to supposedly pay for our sins.
00:20:03.980You know, and this actually goes back to the Warsaw Convention on loss and damage.
00:20:10.320But the IGJC, International Court of Justice, they're now saying that this should be used as a foundation for international discussions, negotiations, and laws, actual laws, to force us to pay for our sins.
00:20:24.920Now, you know, the crazy thing is, we were just interviewing Ken Green from the Fraser Institute just an hour ago, and he pointed out something I think that was really important for people to realize.
00:20:34.900It's true that right now, the developed world, you know, Canada, the United States, England, etc., is responsible for most of the CO2 from humans in the atmosphere.
00:20:44.200But the point Ken made is that China is expanding so quickly, I mean, since the year 2000, I was looking at a graph the other day, since the year 2000, they have multiplied their coal usage by five, okay, a 400% increase, if you can believe that.
00:21:01.260And so, I mean, by the year 2100, Ken pointed out, with China expanding so quickly, India as well, most of the greenhouse gases that are supposedly going to be causing us all this trouble, which it won't be, but most of it will be from the developing world.
00:21:19.100So, exempting them from reducing their emissions, which, you know, the Framework Convention on Climate Change does that.
00:21:25.900I mean, a lot of people say, oh, well, China has to cap its emissions at 2030, according to the Paris Agreement.
00:21:32.180And, you know, it's funny, because they know they have a sweetheart deal, because the underlying document under the Paris Agreement is the Framework Convention on Climate Change that was signed by Brian Mulroney back in 1992 in Rio.
00:21:45.660It was at the Earth Summit. And it says in Article 4, and this is the rules, and China knows this, it says the first and overriding priority of developing nations, which they still count China as developing nations, the first and overriding priority is poverty alleviation and development.
00:22:02.820So, what's going to happen come 2030 is China's emissions are going to soar through the limit, and people are going to say, oh, you're supposed to cap your emissions, and they say, nope, we've got an out clause.
00:22:13.940And, you know, you'd laugh, Sheila, they cornered the Chinese negotiator in Peru back in 2014, when they were negotiating the Paris Agreement, and they asked him, you know, we'd like to revisit this Framework Convention, it doesn't quite seem fair anymore.
00:22:28.260And the Chinese negotiator said, no, the purpose of the Paris Agreement is to enforce the Climate Framework Convention, it's not to change it.
00:22:37.840So, China, who are supplying us with most of the green energy stuff, which isn't really green, they're just laughing all the way to the bank.
00:22:46.440They'll be able to build coal stations across the world, throughout their country, as much as they want, sell us the green technology, which isn't really green, and they will make an absolute fortune.
00:22:56.900So, I mean, obviously, you know, the Chinese representatives, they love this climate change.
00:23:03.600I'd be surprised if we wouldn't be obligated to pay them something under this.
00:23:07.340Yeah, and it's sad that Pierre Polyev doesn't really attack this and say, look, you know, the major supplier of EVs is China, the major supplier of wind turbines and solar panels, etc., etc.
00:23:18.720You know, this is a make-work project, a make-profit project for China, basically.
00:23:24.080In fact, I'm just about to publish an article on this about how the West is being taken for a ride, you know.
00:23:29.920We were just in Sicily, and we learned all about the mafia, okay?
00:23:34.240And it's really pretty interesting because across Sicily, this is a bit of a side note, they put up this little sticker a few years ago.
00:23:42.980And what it says in Italian is, a people who pays protection to the mafia are a people without dignity.
00:25:10.900Yeah, and, you know, when Pierre Polyev was running to be leader of the Conservative Party, I spoke to his campaign manager.
00:25:17.220And the implication, he wouldn't have stated outright, obviously, for clear reasons, but the implication was that Pierre had to support the climate scare to become prime minister.
00:25:50.640Trump has won two elections in a row saying the same thing, that this is a complete hoax.
00:25:57.120So for the internal people who design communications for the Conservative Party, they're completely off base.
00:26:04.240Not only are they wrong, because there is no climate scare, there is no climate crisis, I should say, and all of these policies are just going to make our products uncompetitive.
00:26:12.720But it's not true that you have to support the climate scare to become elected.
00:26:18.000We see that over and over across the world in other places as well.
00:26:21.400So it's going to become apparent to grassroots people in the Conservative Party that their policy is totally wrong, and they better darn well change it, or they're going to stay in opposition forever.
00:26:40.480Maybe we'll lose you, and then, of course, we'll lose our piggy bank.
00:26:45.380Yeah, and with us goes Saskatchewan, and I bet you these parts of BC would have a serious discussion.
00:26:51.880But that is, I think, a cultural difference in this entire country.
00:26:57.700It's grassroots conservatives in Alberta and Saskatchewan who work in industry, but who also work in agriculture, so who rely on the wind and the rain and the weather for their livelihood.
00:27:36.620But I'm hoping that more and more Albertans will speak out as the Americans are going to do in support of the endangerment finding retraction.
00:27:44.020I think it's going to give, you know, there's, I should just advertise our book.
00:27:48.680You know, this is a book from Canadians for Sensible Climate Policy, Energy and Climate at a Glance.
00:27:55.760And it's written by Ron Davidson from the Friends of Science, who you know very well, and Sterling Burnett.
00:28:01.820And I'm a contributing author, along with Bob Lyman and a few others.
00:28:05.040But, yeah, so people have got to read this because it gives you factoids, you know, literally quick facts to fight against the climate scare.
00:28:13.140And keep your eyes open because American media are going to be forced to reveal a lot of the other side of the argument because it's going to be a Donnybrook.
00:28:22.380For the next four years, we're going to see a big amount of fighting in the U.S.
00:28:26.380And happily, you know, we're going to hear from our side for a change.
00:30:21.660As always, I turn over the last segment of the show to you because without you, there's no rebel news.
00:30:27.260You know, we'll never take a penny from, I guess it's Mark Carney now or any level of government to do the work that we do to hold the government to account on behalf of the people.
00:30:40.160It's my job to make sure they're doing that, or at least when they're not, that someone is pointing it out to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.
00:31:00.100Put gun show letters in the subject line so I know why you're emailing me.
00:31:03.820But also, if you are watching, I know you guys are all who are watching this right now, premium subscribers to the show.
00:31:11.380But if you are sharing the clips of the show to your friends, you know, the clips that we post on YouTube or on Rumble for free, please encourage your friends, potential new subscribers to leave comments there.
00:31:25.260I go looking for their comments all the time and leaving comments also does another thing.
00:31:29.500It helps push our content in front of more eyeballs.
00:31:32.300The platforms see that our content is being engaged with, and so they serve it up in front of more people, and it's the best free way to help us.
00:31:44.700And on my interview with Chris Sims about the hundreds of managers that they have over at the CBC, like managers, producers, senior producers, like, I don't even know what all these people do.
00:31:59.600And I work in the industry, you know, just consultants and like managers, executive managers.
00:32:40.340And so she was sort of like, what are they even talking about?
00:32:46.560Well, I don't know when she doesn't know what I've been doing this job for 10 years.
00:32:52.500Why do they need all those people working at the CBC, except for the fact that they don't have to worry about efficiency or meeting a budget?
00:32:59.780Because they just come to us and say, please, sir, can we have some more?
00:34:27.040They're entitled to their entitlements, aren't they?
00:34:32.700SSPJ7BC says, sunshine is the best disinfectant.
00:34:36.340Keep shining and exposing the corruption, rebel news.
00:34:38.420Now, I'm just reporting on the good work that Chris Sims at the Canadian Taxpayers Federation did.
00:34:43.280But I think it's so important that people who are doing the work to hold the government to account on behalf of the people, especially when they work for the people and it's the people's money they're wasting.
00:34:54.960Like government doesn't have any money.
00:36:36.900And Peter Batista1095 says, and the most disgusting thing about this, if you ask them, is that they will try to justify those exorbitant wages.