Global warming conspiracy theory is a collection of allegations that, through worldwide acts of professional and criminal misconduct, the science behind anthropogenic global warming has been invented and is being perpetuated for financial or ideological reasons. With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,Global warming activists are as misguided as they are alarmist
Subscribe to this blog
Follow by Email
Fracking defended at coal’s expense with EPA air quality junk science
PITTSBURGH — A project examining the local health effects from natural gas drilling is providing some of the first preliminary numbers about people who may be affected, and the results challenge the industry position that no one suffers but also suggest that the problems may not be as widespread as some critics claim.
The Southwest Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project has been trying to help people who feel they’ve been sickened by natural gas drilling or processing for about 18 months in one county south of Pittsburgh.
The work is potentially important because it’s one of the first long-term attempts to monitor drilling-related health effects, and it could help other groups identify possible symptoms.
The project found 27 cases where people in Washington County believe they were hurt by nearby drilling — seven cases of skin rashes, four of eye irritation, 13 of breathing problems and three of headaches and dizziness. The skin exposures were from water and the other cases were from air. The numbers don’t represent a full survey of the area, just cases with plausible exposures.
The EHP group is trying to help people who have been exposed to drilling-related air or water pollution, toxicologist David Brown told the Associated Press, adding that they’re finding “an array of symptoms” in some people who live close to wells or processing stations.
There were some surprises: Air pollution seems to be more of a threat than tainted water, and the huge processing stations that push gas into national pipelines may be more of a problem than the drilling sites themselves. The processing stations can handle large volumes of gas from hundreds of wells.
Washington County has a population of about 200,000, and about 700 natural gas wells have been drilled there in the past six years. It’s also home to large gas processing operations.
Some experts not involved with the findings praised the general program, but said the debate over fracking and health often neglects a crucial point. Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is a technique in which water is mixed with sand and chemicals and injected into rock formations to break them up and free trapped gases.
“There’s a strong case that people in the U.S. are already leading longer lives as a consequence of the fracking revolution,” said Michael Greenstone, a professor of environmental economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. That’s because many power plants have stopped burning coal and switched to natural gas, which emits far less fine soot, nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide.
“Obviously, that has to be counterbalanced against the local effects of the drilling,” and that makes for a complicated decision, said Greenstone, formerly one of President Obama’s chief economic advisers. Obama has expressed strong support for the natural gas drilling boom, and has said it can be done safely.
Greenstone said more work needs to be done to confirm that Washington County residents were affected by natural gas activity and not by other factors, but he called the project an “important start.”
The EHP group only counted cases where symptoms began after natural gas activity started, where there was a plausible source of exposure and where the individual didn’t have an underlying medical condition that was likely to have caused the symptoms.
Brown said the project team is aware that more work needs to be done on links between natural gas activities and their effects on health. He said the work has been “a lot harder than I thought it was going to be,” but substantial progress has been made.
Brown said one of the most worrying findings was the extremely high levels of air pollution found inside two homes that are about 1,000 feet from a gas processing station. Western Pennsylvania tends to have high levels of air pollution, but the levels found in the two homes were up to four times higher than the local average.
Brown said the group is collecting more data and pushing ahead to refine ways to advise people who are worried about nearby natural gas activity.
Hurricane Jose is still churning several hundred miles away in the
Atlantic Ocean, but already reports indicate that the fifth named storm
of the 2017 hurricane season will have negative impact on the east coast
of the United States.
What you need to knowDespite being a Category 4 hurricane at the height of its intensity, Jose has weakened to a Category 1.Weather Underground meteorologist Jeff Masters has reported
that it’s unlikely that Jose will make a U.S. landfall, as most
computer models indicate that the hurricane will continue to travel in a
tight loop and remain hundreds of miles away.If the hurricane continues its odd, spiraled path, impacts along the east coast could include rip currents, beach erosion and rough surf, according to AccuWeather.
What you can doHave a plan. Regardless of whether or not Jose
impacts the east coast, a plan for inclement weather should always be in
place and be ready to go at a moment’s notice.
Keep aware of the risks that might be posed …
We’ve all been subjected to the incessant “97% of scientists agree …global warming…blah blah” meme, which is nothing more than another statistical fabrication by John Cook and his collection of “anything for the cause” zealots. As has been previously pointed out on WUWT, when you look at the methodology used to reach that number, the veracity of the result falls apart, badly. You see, it turns out that Cook simply employed his band of “Skeptical Science” (SkS) eco-zealots to rate papers, rather than letting all authors of the papers rate their own work (Note: many authors weren’t even contacted and their papers wrongly rated, see here). The result was that the “97% consensus” was a survey of the SkS raters beliefs and interpretations, rather than a survey of the authors opinions of their own science abstracts. Essentially it was pal-review by an activist group with a strong bias towards a particular outcome as demonstrated by the name “the consensus project”.
In short, it was a lie o…