America, as well as many other places throughout the world, has witnessed mass protests, claiming catastrophic disasters if fossil fuels are not eliminated. However, only a very small percentage of protesters know the methods and science upon which they are protesting. This is dangerous to our society.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt announced plans to scrap an Obama regulation on fuel efficiency. Obama’s policy spiked automobile prices and outpaced the industry’s ability to adapt.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently waived Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) requirement for Andeavor, one of the nation’s largest oil refineries. Andeavor’s exemption tolls a death knell for the RFS and its crony backers.

President Obama’s “Clean Power Plan” (CPP) drains our economy for Sierra Club hysteria. CPP sacrifices thousands of jobs, billions in growth, and lots of happiness. Thankfully, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt will likely toss it.

Reports say President Trump might fund his trillion dollar infrastructure plan with a $.25 per-gallon gasoline tax, an AWFUL proposal. Hiking the federal gas tax is crazy – gas prices are already high thanks to the horrid Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), a secret tax and fake-science subsidy that hurts Americans.

On Tuesday, the Obama administration’s attempt to seize control of the nation’s energy infrastructure faced its latest day in court before the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The so-called Clean Power Plan (CPP), which would more accurately be described as the Creating Poverty Plan for its increased energy costs that fall hardest on poor Americans, is the centerpiece of President Obama’s global warming agenda. It seeks to impose massive regulatory costs on the nation’s economy in order to supposedly prevent less than 0.02 degrees of temperature increase by 2100.

When calculating the future impacts of government action, the federal government has very specific rules about how the calculation should be done. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearly states that when calculating the cost of future impacts a standard “discount rate” of 7% should be used (a discount rate is used to take account of the fact that $10 today is worth more than $20 10 years from now). But when it comes to global warming regulation, that 7% rate is a problem for bureaucrats. With a 7% discount rate, the present cost of future global warming is virtually zero, even using the federal government’s excessively alarmist models. What’s a radical federal bureaucrat to do when math says that global warming will have virtually no negative economic effect? Well, they take a page from Common Core and change how they do the math.