Researchers advocate using existing aircraft, sulfur to block sunlight amid UK-backed trials



A study published Monday in the American Geophysical Union's peer-reviewed journal Earth's Future suggested, largely on the basis of different aerosol injection simulations, that it might be worthwhile using existing commercial jetliners to pollute the skies with toxic sulfur dioxide particles in order to dim the sun and thereby cool the planet.

Researchers from University College London indicated that weaponizing jets like the Boeing 777F — roughly 36 of which are produced a year — against the sun would would mean "lower technical barriers," a potential increase in "the number of actors able to produce a substantial global cooling using SAI [stratospheric aerosol injection]," and an earlier potential start date for this master plan.

They acknowledged, however, that the use of existing aircraft for the purposes of SAI would be less efficient than having specialized aircraft flying at altitudes of over 12 miles to conduct dumps and more likely to generate undesirable side effects.

'Dousing our citizens, our waterways and landscapes with toxins.'

According to the study, "Low-altitude SAI with high-latitude and seasonal injection, could achieve a substantial global cooling effect using existing large jetliners with a service ceiling of 13 km."

The researchers estimated "a global cooling of 0.6°C for an injection of 12 Tg at 13 km altitude at 60° North and South, in the local spring and summer." In other words, climate meddlers might be able to cool the planet down just over half a degree with a seasonal dumping of over 13.2 million tons of sulfur at the latitudes of Anchorage, Alaska, and the southern tip of South America.

In effect, they would be emulating the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo, which injected 20 million tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere and caused a rapid half-degree drop in global temperatures. According to NASA, this drop lasted for two years until the sulfate dropped out of the atmosphere.

"We find this strategy would have only 35% of the forcing efficiency of a conventional high-altitude-subtropical injection, which would lead to a proportionate increase in the side-effects of SAI per unit cooling, such as human exposure to descending particulate matter," wrote the researchers.

In addition to "dousing our citizens, our waterways and landscapes with toxins," as Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. put it last month, the embrace of this strategy might increase the "risk of unilateral or poorly planned deployment," said the researchers.

Dozens of U.S. states have taken steps to ban geoengineering and weather modification activities. Earlier this month, the Florida Senate passed legislation that would protect the Sunshine State's skies from climate alarmists' shadowy designs. The United Kingdom has gone in the other direction.

Blaze News recently reported that the U.K. is throwing its approval and weight behind solar geoengineering experiments to be conducted by the Advanced Research and Invention Agency.

'That means that we would need to use three times the amount of aerosol to have the same effect on global temperature.'

Even with America's geoengineering bans, the homeland could potentially be impacted by foreign SAI experiments should the U.K. or another national entity decide to unilaterally execute SAI operations ahead of schedule, thanks to the embrace of modified jetliners.

A 2017 study published in Nature Communications indicated that SAI only in the northern hemisphere might increase droughts, hurricanes, and storms elsewhere, and concluded that "the impacts of SG would not be entirely confined to the perturbed region."

Lead author Alistair Duffey on the new study in Earth's Future told Phys.org, "Solar geoengineering comes with serious risks and much more research is needed to understand its impacts. However, our study suggests that it is easier to cool the planet with this particular intervention than we thought. This has implications for how quickly stratospheric aerosol injection could be started and by who."

"There are downsides to this polar low-altitude strategy," continued Duffey. "At this lower altitude, stratospheric aerosol injection is about one-third as effective. That means that we would need to use three times the amount of aerosol to have the same effect on global temperature, increasing side effects such as acid rain. The strategy would also be less effective at cooling the tropics, where the direct vulnerability to warming is highest."

Duffey added that "climate change is a serious problem," intimating that policymakers might weight the perceived threat of changing weather patterns as more concerning than the threats posed dumping chemicals overhead and generating acidic precipitation.

Columbia University's Climate School noted last April, "Studies show that stratospheric aerosol injection could weaken the stratospheric ozone layer, alter precipitation patterns, and affect agriculture, ecosystem services, marine life, and air quality. Moreover, the impacts and risks would vary by how and where it is deployed, the climate, ecosystems, and the population."

Matthew Henry of the University of Exeter, one of Duffey's co-authors, made clear to Phys.org that even with solar geoengineering, climate alarmists will still want to continue with their project of social engineering: "Stratospheric aerosol injection is certainly not a replacement for greenhouse gas emission reductions as any potential negative side effects increase with the amount of cooling: we can only achieve long-term climate stability with net zero."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

'We're not playing that game': Florida Senate passes ban on geoengineering, weather modifications



The Florida Senate passed a bill prohibiting geoengineering and weather modification activities in a 28-9 vote on Thursday, taking the state one step closer to securing its sunny skies from climate alarmists' shadowy and potentially deadly schemes.

The successful vote comes just after Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. identified Florida as one of over two dozen states that are moving to "ban geoengineering our climate by dousing our citizens, our waterways, and landscapes with toxins."

The health secretary noted further that "this is a movement every MAHA needs to support" and that "HHS will do its part."

Background

There have long been efforts, some apparently successful and others deadly, to meddle with the weather.

The United Arab Emirates has, for instance, conducted cloud-seeding missions for decades and has in recent years conducted over 1,000 hours of cloud-seeding missions annually. One government meteorologist blamed such operations for the torrential rains that rocked Dubai last April, which resulted in deadly floods.

Cloud seeding entails the release of tiny particles, such as potassium chloride, into clouds in an effort to artificially increase precipitation.

Lewis Brackpool, an independent journalist and the host of the podcast "The State of It," previously alerted Blaze News to declassified documents showing that the U.K.'s Royal Air Force experimented with artificial rainmaking in the 1950s as part of Operation Cumulus the same week that some of the worst flash floods ever to have hit Britain stormed the village of Lynmouth, killing 35.

'These planes release aluminum, sulfates, and other compounds with unknown and harmful effects on human health.'

Cloud seeding in Utah reportedly helped increase the state's water supply by 12% in 2018.

Rather than trying to make it rain, some scientists have committed to dimming the sun — despite a 2017 study in Nature Communications indicating that aerosols released into the air in an effort to block the sun could lead to an increase in droughts, hurricanes, and storms.

Last year, the Marine Cloud Brightening Program's Coastal Atmospheric Aerosol Research and Engagement project, led by researchers from the University of Washington, fired particles into the sky above the San Francisco Bay as part of an experiment ultimately aimed at blocking sunlight and limiting "global warming."

The bill

Miami Republican Ileana Garcia's Senate Bill 56 would prohibit "the injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of a chemical, a chemical compound, a substance, or an apparatus into the atmosphere within the borders of this state for the express purpose of affecting the temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight."

Should Garcia's bill pass as is, cloud seeding, sun dimming, and other such efforts to modify the weather could land the offending scientist or organization with a $100,000 fine as well as third-degree felony charges. An aircraft operator involved in such felonious efforts could be slapped with a $5,000 fine and up to five years in prison.

"There is a lot of unauthorized activity that is currently not regulated both at a federal and a state level, and this is where we wanted to start," Garcia told her peers in the state Senate, reported the Florida Phoenix. "This is how we are trying to create a method to the madness by creating a reporting mechanism that starts with complaints to the Department of Environmental Protection."

Florida Senate President Ben Albritton reportedly lauded Garcia for producing a "great piece of legislation."

'Tell the House of Representatives in Florida to not gut this bill.'

Albritton told Florida's Voice that when Garcia first raised her concerns about weather modification with him, he initially didn't believe there were such efforts to "control God's domain."

"Honestly, I had a hard time believing it at first, and then she sent me information and sent me websites and all of this," said Albritton. "All of a sudden, I thought, 'Holy mackerel.'"

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo also celebrated Garcia for pushing the legislation.

"Big thanks to Senator Garcia for leading efforts to reduce geoengineering and weather modification activities in our Florida skies," said Ladapo. "These planes release aluminum, sulfates, and other compounds with unknown and harmful effects on human health. We have to keep fighting to clean up the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat."

The House version

While greatly supportive of Garcia's SB 56, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) indicated that the version in the Florida House would betray the purpose of the exercise, codifying the practices as opposed to preventing them outright.

"The Florida House of Representatives has gutted Senator Garcia's legislation," DeSantis said in a video Wednesday. "They would actually codify the practice of geoengineering and weather modification. People got a lot of kooky ideas that they can get in and put things in the atmosphere to block the sun and save us from climate change. We're not playing that game in Florida."

DeSantis added, "I support what Senator Garcia is doing, and I hope that people will tell the House of Representatives in Florida to not gut this bill."

Republican state Rep. Kevin Steele's House Bill 477 does not ban weather modification outright. Instead it requires weather meddlers to first procure a license to do so.

Anyone found to have conducted a weather modification operation without a license or with a revoked license would face a maximum fine of $10,000 — rather than the Senate's proposed fine of $100,000. Violations would qualify as second-degree misdemeanors as opposed to felonies.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Climate hysteria sets stage for suicidal behavior: Study



Climate alarmists are future-oriented in their activism. It turns out, however, that their obsession may, in some cases, ensure that they will never meet the imminent world they tried to shape with demonstrations, public tantrums, ruinous leftist policies, and vandalism.

A paper by European and Canadian researchers published Friday in the journal Nature Medicine examined the "associations between climate-related hazards and the spectrum of suicidal behaviors, from suicidal ideation to self-harm and suicide mortality."

Citing previous studies, the researchers noted that, unsurprisingly, people directly exposed to extreme weather events may experience an increased risk of post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation. Slow-moving albeit similarly devastating environmental phenomena appear to similarly have an emotionally destabilizing impact on some individuals — the Indian farmer, for instance, who is driven to despair by drought, low crop yields, and the prospect of destitution or even starvation.

The study suggested, however, that individuals who are not directly impacted by changing weather patterns have also been observed getting bent out of shape to the point of depression and suicidality.

"Negative psychological responses related to the observed and anticipated impacts of climate change, such as climate anxiety, eco-anxiety and climate-related guilt have also emerged as a potential risk factor for poor mental health and suicide-related behavior," said the study, adding that international surveys have indicated "concern about climate change is associated with feelings of despair, hopelessness, anger, frustration, and guilt, especially among younger populations."

'Exposure to the report had a weaker association with perceived threat and climate change concern among politically right-leaning individuals.'

A study published in the Annual Review of Environment and Resources noted that while so-called climate change "has long been seen as psychologically distant from many people and therefore as a rather non-emotional problem," this view has changed in recent years, partly as a consequence of climate alarmist propaganda pushed in the media and in schools — propaganda that inevitably oversells bad news and overlooks good news, such as carbon emissions' greening of the planet.

"Many people experience climate change and other global environmental problems indirectly, or vicariously, through media representations rather than from direct exposure," said the study. "Exposure to climate change information through the media plays an important role in determining how worried people are about climate change."

A 2019 study found that Norwegians' exposure to an alarmist United Nations report on climate change was associated "with greater perceived threat from climate change and increased climate change concern."

The induction of concern worked particularly well with left-leaning individuals:

Exposure to the report had a weaker association with perceived threat and climate change concern among politically right-leaning individuals, compared with their left-leaning counterparts, and there was no association between exposure to the report and climate change concern among individuals who self-identified as being on the far-right end of the political spectrum.

These manufactured concerns can turn malignant and metastasize.

A 2020 American study published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology found that climate change anxiety is not uncommon, particularly among younger adults, and is correlated with emotional responses — responses that apparently drive some victims of propaganda to swear off having children. A 2021 Lancet-published survey of 10,000 youths ages 16-25 indicated that 39% of respondents expressed hesitancy about procreating on account of climate change.

The study published last week in Nature Medicine identified various pathways from "climate-related hazards to suicidal behaviors."

For those in the camp of the indirectly impacted, such as the Norwegian cohort confronted with the U.N. concern-mongers' report, chronic, vicarious exposure to climate change can result in lowered well-being, which in turn sets the stage for suicidal behaviors.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Zeldin closes Biden’s climate museum over massive taxpayer waste



Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin on Monday announced the closure of the $4 million agency museum built by the Biden administration.

Zeldin referred to the one-room, 1,595-square-foot facility as one of former President Joe Biden's failed "pet projects," noting that during its nine months of operations, it saw fewer than 2,000 external visitors.

'The museum closure represents just one step in our broader commitment to transparency and fiscal responsibility.'

While admission was free to the public, he stated that each visitor cost taxpayers $315.

The museum is located at the EPA's Washington, D.C., headquarters and opened in May 2024. Despite its small size, the facility cost $4 million to open and costs another $600,000 annually.

Zeldin shared a video on X giving a tour of the museum and explaining the decision to shut it down.

He stated that a timeline featured in the museum "conveniently omits" President Donald Trump's first administration. A separate video showed a gap in the timeline between 2014 and 2021.

"This agency has been spending $123,000 on cleaning, $207,000 for security, $54,000 on maintenance, and an additional $54,000 on storage," Zeldin said. "From May 2024 through last month, only 1,909 members of the public visited the museum. Even though it is free admission, this museum costs you, the taxpayer, $315 per external visitor."

He described it as a "shrine to [environmental justice] and climate change."

"Under President Trump, we are ending the practice of burning tax dollars on pet projects," Zeldin declared.

In a Monday op-ed on Fox News, Zeldin stated that he has terminated Biden-era spending that will save taxpayers $22 billion.

Zeldin noted that the money allocated toward the "scarcely visited" museum could have been used by the Biden administration to provide "clean air, land, and water to forgotten communities."

"The museum closure represents just one step in our broader commitment to transparency and fiscal responsibility," Zeldin wrote. "This isn't about diminishing our commitment to environmental protection; it's about enhancing it through responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars. The days of unchecked spending on monuments to the egos of the left are over. Under our leadership, fiscal responsibility and mission focus will guide every decision. The American people deserve nothing less."

Additionally, Zeldin announced on Tuesday that the EPA would be moving out of its D.C. headquarters.

"EPA will be saving American taxpayers $18 MILLION in annual lease costs by moving staff out of the 323,000 square feet of space we occupy in the Ronald Reagan building in D.C.," he stated.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biden admin hindered efforts to cancel grants to climate groups under criminal investigation



In the wake of President Donald Trump's landslide electoral victory, the Biden administration apparently reworked an Environmental Protection Agency grant agreement with an Obama administration staffer's climate alarmist group in order to make it difficult for the incoming administration to reclaim a $7 billion award.

Climate United Fund, one of the recipients of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund program that is now under criminal investigation and getting axed by the Trump EPA, is now apparently exploiting that strategic hindrance in a desperate effort to get its hands on the money promised by the Biden administration.

Background

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency announced the discovery last month that the Biden administration parked roughly $20 billion at Citibank as part of a climate-branded scheme created under the Inflation Reduction Act that was "purposefully designed to obligate all of the money in a rush job with reduced oversight" for the benefit of fellow travelers.

The agency indicated on March 2 that it was cooperating with the Department of Justice and FBI's ongoing criminal investigation into the matter and that it had also referred the "concerning matter of financial mismanagement, conflicts of interest, and oversight failures" in the GGRF program to the EPA's Office of Inspector General.

One of the intended recipients of the funds was a new nonprofit linked to staunch Biden ally Stacey Abrams, the failed gubernatorial candidate who sided with alleged domestic terrorists in 2023 and was slapped in January with what the Georgia State Ethics Commission indicated was likely "the largest Ethics Fine ever imposed by any State Ethics Commission in the country related to an election and campaign finance case."

The Abrams-linked nonprofit, Power Forward Communities, was awarded a $2 billion grant last year as part of the GGRF program despite being just a few months old and having no history of competently managing funds.

Daniel Turner, founder and executive director of the energy advocacy organization Power the Future, told Blaze News that the obligation of billions of taxpayer dollars to PFC and other brand-new climate groups with minimal or no track records of accomplishments "screams corruption and is absolutely worthy of IRS and DOJ investigations."

'EPA has determined that these deficiencies pose an unacceptable risk to the efficient and lawful execution of this grant.'

"I've always enjoyed the show 'Shark Tank,' and since I spend about half my life on the road and I'm in hotels a lot, it's kind of my go-to program to watch at nighttime," said Turner. "The sharks always ask about earnings before they make an investment, and that's usually where they will decide what they're going to do. Stacey Abrams' group had received $100 in donations and then got a $2 billion grant. The math tells me that that is a 20 million-times earnings investment. I've never never seen a shark make an investment at 20 million times earnings."

"It shows you the frivolity of the people in these agencies, the true political nature of grant-making, and it also explains the ire these folks have towards Elon Musk and DOGE — the ire that's turned into complete violence," continued Turner. "This is their lifeblood, and it's being taken away from them, but it never should have been theirs to begin with."

Climate United Fund's money troubles

Climate United Fund, an organization formed in 2024 and led by Beth Bafford, a former special assistant in the Obama administration's Office of Management and Budget, similarly planned to ride the last gravy train out of the Biden administration.

According to court documents, the FBI recommended that Citibank freeze CUF's account in late February, citing "credible information" that it was among a number of accounts that had "been involved in possible criminal violations" including wire fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States.

On March 4, the Treasury Department directed Citibank not to disburse funds from the GGRF accounts, including that belonging to CUF, citing the EPA's "concerns regarding potential fraud and/or conflicts of interest related to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund."

When it discovered that it couldn't drain its slush fund and that it might not ultimately receive any of its $6.97 billion GGRF award, CUF — like other groups impacted by the EPA's funding freeze and grant terminations — filed a lawsuit on March 8 against both the EPA and Citibank, alleging that the "EPA has acted to prevent Citibank from dispersing [sic] funds, harming Climate United, its borrowers, and the communities they serve."

The EPA, which proved willing to battle it out in the court, subsequently notified the plaintiffs that it was terminating their grants, stating that "following a comprehensive review and consistent with multiple ongoing independent federal investigations into programmatic fraud, waste, abuse, and conflicts of interest ... EPA has determined that these deficiencies pose an unacceptable risk to the efficient and lawful execution of this grant."

'They're just fighting for their own entity's survival because they don't want to get a real job.'

According to the grant agreement between the climate groups and the EPA, the awards can be terminated only if:

  • "a grant recipient engages in 'substantial' noncompliance such that 'effective performance' is 'materially impaired'";
  • "a recipient engages in 'material misrepresentation of eligibility status'"; or
  • "for 'waste, fraud, or abuse.'"

An Obama judge ruled Tuesday that the EPA could not reclaim the Biden-era grants. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan did not, however, enable CUF and other climate alarmist groups to withdraw the billions of taxpayer dollars they believe they are owed.

The climate groups' efforts to get their hands on the taxpayer funds have dragged some questionable details about the grants into the light.

EPA's diminished agency

Sarah Bedford of the Washington Examiner highlighted that a month after Trump crushed Kamala Harris at the polls, the Biden Environmental Protection Agency amended its grant agreement with Climate United Fund, making it harder to revoke the award.

Eric Amidon, chief of staff of the EPA, noted in a Monday court filing that the agency's grant agreement with CUF originally issued in August did not "define the terms 'materially impaired' or 'waste, fraud, and abuse,' and used the terms in a manner that left EPA with significant discretion to administer the agreement." However, Amidon noted that in December 2024, the EPA issued an amended grant agreement to CUF that altered its compliance and termination provisions and defined the above terms.

As a consequence of the changes, the EPA effectively lost its contractual authority "to find CUF in immediate noncompliance for failing to report the expenditure of grant funds, audit results, and project status"; "to oversee subrecipient compliance with statutory, regulatory, and contractual requirements"; and to spend grant funds only on allowable activities," said Amidon.

Amidon also indicated that the Biden administration's post-election definitions for "materially impaired" and "waste, fraud, and abuse" further tied the EPA's hands, restricting the agency's ability to terminate the award "absent evidence of severe criminal or civil violations."

Climate United Fund has leaned on the agreement in its lawsuit against the EPA and Citibank.

"This is absolutely intentional," Turner told Blaze News, referring to the broader alleged "gold bars" plot. "This was all very deliberate in preparation for what the Trump administration would do."

Brent Efron, a former EPA special adviser for implementation, was caught on hidden camera before Trump took office claiming that the agency was dumping billions of dollars in grants to nonprofits to make sure the Biden administration's climate initiatives remained afloat even after the Democrats lost their footing in the White House.

"Now it's how to get the money out as fast as possible before they [Trump administration] come in," said Efron. "It's like we're on the Titanic and we're throwing gold bars off the edge."

"In the grants process, grants can always be amended by the grantor. I deal with donors who want to fund certain projects, and circumstances change, and therefore the nature of the grant changes. That's understandable," said Turner. "But it's never been about an election, and that's the only criteria that changed with some of these groups that were awarded grants — Trump was now going to be president. And so it does raise a larger question: What was the grant ever about? What was the grant's nature? Because if it was combatting racial disparities in the climate space or whatever the phraseology they used, none of that has changed. Only thing that changed was the political circumstances, and so changing the grant based on politics sort of de facto proves that the nature of the grant is purely political."

Turner suggested that the groups now fighting over the frozen slush fund are "fighting for the quality of life that the taxpayers were awarding them. They're not fighting for groups. They're not fighting for maligned or marginalized individuals. They're just fighting for their own entity's survival because they don't want to get a real job."

Blaze News reached out to the EPA for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump EPA going on deregulation spree that's already hurting climate alarmists' feelings



The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Wednesday that it is planning to undertake a sweeping series of deregulatory actions in accordance with President Donald Trump's executive orders and campaign promises.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin identified dozens of Obama and Biden-era regulations that his agency will repeal, stating, "We are driving a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion to drive down cost of living for American families, unleash American energy, bring auto jobs back to the U.S., and more."

In addition to unchaining industry and eliminating some of the bureaucratic red tape that drove up living costs, the agency appears keen to reclaim ground lost to climate alarmists over the past two decades, effectively eliminating the EPA's authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

'This EPA is planning to take a wrecking ball to environmental law.'

The agency deregulation push includes plans to:

  • unwind numerous regulations on power plants, the oil and gas industry, and coal-fired power;
  • revise limits, guidelines, and standards for the steam electric power-generating industry;
  • reconsider various industrial regulations concerning air standards;
  • unwind the mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program that requires big emitters to report their emissions annually for publication;
  • reconsider the Risk Management Program rule that purportedly improves chemical accident prevention at facilities that use extremely hazardous substances;
  • unwind the vehicle regulations "that provided the foundation for the Biden-Harris electric vehicle mandate";
  • reconsider the Obama EPA's 2009 Endangerment Finding and all subsequent actions that rely on its assertion that the combined emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride from motorized vehicles "threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations" — a claim Zeldin said is "considered the Holy Grail of the climate change religion";
  • eliminate the remaining DEI initiatives at the agency;
  • ensure the death of the Biden administration's controversial "Good Neighbor Plan," which tried to force so-called "upwind" states to curb air pollution impacting "downwind" states — a plan whose standards the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June were likely to cause "irreparable harm" to nearly half the states in the union; and
  • utilize "enforcement discretion to further North Carolina’s recovery from Hurricane Helene."

The EPA suggested that these and other deregulatory actions could "roll back trillions in regulatory costs and hidden 'taxes' on U.S. families" as well as create jobs.

Climate alarmists are up in arms over the announcement.

Jason Rylander, legal director of the Climate Law Institute at the Center for Biological Diversity, told NPR, "This EPA is planning to take a wrecking ball to environmental law as we know it."

"The intent appears to be to neuter EPA's ability to address climate change and to limit air pollution that affects public health," added Rylander.

Amanda Leland, executive director of the leftist international Environmental Defense Fund, said in a statement, "EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin today announced plans for the greatest increase in pollution in decades. The result will be more toxic chemicals, more cancers, more asthma attacks, and more dangers for pregnant women and their children. Rather than helping our economy, it will create chaos."

The New York Times indicated that Gina McCarthy, an EPA administrator in the Obama administration, is sad to see some of her handiwork undone, calling it "the most disastrous day in EPA history."

"Rolling these rules back is not just a disgrace, it's a threat to all of us," said McCarthy, who also served as former President Joe Biden's national climate adviser. "The agency has fully abdicated its mission to protect Americans' health and well being."

Democratic lawmakers have similarly denounced the EPA's deregulatory plans.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) stated, "EPA's attacks today on clean air, clean water, and affordable energy are done for the planet's biggest polluters. Americans will pay dearly — with their health and with their wallets.

"This sellout has a long road ahead of it through the Administrative Procedures Act, which we will fight every step of the way," added Whitehouse.

Republicans and others long critical of the burdens of over-regulation celebrated the EPA plan.

Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) called it a "historic move that will bring much-needed relief to Montanans."

West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R), chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, is apparently thrilled that the EPA is "taking steps towards eliminating job-killing regulations that hamper energy production and harm workers and consumers across our country."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Miles of protected Amazon rainforest cleared for highway to UN climate summit



Climate alarmists are planning yet another summit under the auspices of the United Nations to discuss changing weather patterns, wealth redistribution schemes, and ways of regulating human behavior.

Instead of holding a virtual meeting, thereby eliminating the need for the November conference's over 50,000 participants to fly around the world, the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference will be held in Belém, Brazil — the gateway to the Amazon River.

To ensure that COP30's participants enjoy easy motorized transit in and out of the city, a four-lane highway is being cut through the protected Amazon forest, which absorbs one-fourth of the supposedly problematic carbon dioxide absorbed by all the land on Earth.

According to the BBC, eight miles of rainforest has already been cut down to make room for the partially built Avenida Liberdade highway. Former carbon-capture systems are being stacked high along the roadside.

The American conservation site Mongabay reported that construction on the highway through the 18,427-acre Belém Environmental Protection Area began on June 15, 2024.

Adler Silveira, the state government's infrastructure secretary, stated at the outset, "We are committed to advancing the works respecting environmental legislation and the preservation of local fauna and flora."

While rainforest is being flattened, the state government indicated that the highway will be illuminated with solar-powered lights and have bicycle lanes.

The state government has reportedly been interested in clearing an 8.3-mile stretch through the beleaguered rainforest to build the highway since at least 2012, but environmental concerns got in the way. The decision to hold COP30 in Belém, however, provided the state with an excuse to start chopping down trees.

'COP30 will be the first to undeniably take place at the epicenter of the climate crisis.'

While at the UN headquarters in New York last year, Hedler Barbalho, the governor of Pará, assured his peers that Belém could handle the conference and that preparations were underway to provide guests with "the most extraordinary experience of the environment ... on the floor of the Amazon."

Brazil's president-designate for the summit, André Aranha Corrêa do Lago, noted in a Monday letter to other parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that "COP30 will be the first to undeniably take place at the epicenter of the climate crisis, and the first to be hosted in the Amazon, one of the world's most vital ecosystems, now at risk of reaching an irreversible tipping point, according to scientists."

Corrêa do Lago noted further that forests — like the one being chopped down outside Belém — "can buy us time in climate action in our rapidly closing window of opportunity. If we reverse deforestation and recover what has been lost, we can unlock massive removals of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere while bringing ecosystems back to life."

Environmentalists and biologists have criticized the project, suggesting that the highway could devastate the local ecosystem and disrupt wildlife movements. Other critics have suggested that the Avenida Liberdade highway will pave the way to more deforestation.

Daniela Dias de Souza, a geographer and project coordinator at the conservation NGO SOS Amazônia, told Mongabay that "deforestation tends to become increasingly stronger along roads because of the opportunities they create, for example illegal logging and even drug trafficking."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biden admin gave $2 billion to Stacey Abrams-linked climate outfit as part of 'gold bar' scheme: Zeldin



Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin and the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency announced the discovery last week that the Biden-Harris administration parked roughly $20 billion at an outside financial institution as part of a scheme "purposefully designed to obligate all of the money in a rush job with reduced oversight."

In the days since, Zeldin has raised questions about one of the intended recipients of the funds — a new nonprofit linked to a staunch ally of the former president and vice president, failed gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams.

"I made a commitment to members of Congress and to the American people to be a good steward of tax dollars, and I’ve wasted no time in keeping my word," Zeldin told the Washington Free Beacon, which highlighted the connection in a report Wednesday. "When we learned about the Biden administration’s scheme to quickly park $20 billion outside the agency, we suspected that some organizations were created out of thin air just to take advantage of this."

The Abrams-linked nonprofit, Power Forward Communities, was founded in 2023 by several groups, including Rewiring America, a climate alarmist outfit focused on electrifying American homes and businesses. Abrams serves as senior counsel at Rewiring America, and she made clear online in October 2023 that she was an engaged player in Rewiring America and the PFC "coalition."

The Beacon indicated that PFC also counts among its partners at least two leftist nonprofits founded by Abrams, the Tides Center-sponsored Southern Advancement Project and Fair Count.

The Biden EPA reportedly awarded the Abrams-linked group a $2 billion grant in April 2024 as part of its $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund Program, which was created under the Inflation Reduction Act.

PFC was one of only eight awardees.

The New York Post highlighted that PFC received the $2 billion grant one month after Abrams pushed back against calls for Biden to drop out of the presidential race, stressing in an Atlanta Journal-Constitution op-ed that Democrats' "path to victory lies in standing by Biden."

The EPA stated at the time that then-newly created PFC was committed to reducing climate and air pollution; delivering benefits to "low-income and disadvantaged communities," and mobilizing financing and private capital.

'It's extremely concerning that an organization that reported just $100 in revenue in 2023 was chosen to receive $2 billion.'

In a press release dated August 2024, PFC stated that with the "funds expected to start flowing into homes in early 2025," it would — in concert with Rewiring America and other coalition members — be able to "transform the marketplace for heat pumps, heat pump water heaters, induction stoves, solar panels, home battery systems, EV chargers, and wiring," as well "boost local economies."

Despite the group's big talk, the Democratic administration's confidence in the Abrams-linked outfit was on shaky ground. Not only was it just a few months old, it had yet to demonstrate any competency managing funds — certainly not billions in taxpayer funds.

"As we continue to learn more about where some of this money went, it is even more apparent how far-reaching and widely accepted this waste and abuse has been," Zeldin told the Beacon. "It's extremely concerning that an organization that reported just $100 in revenue in 2023 was chosen to receive $2 billion. That's 20 million times the organization’s reported revenue."

Neither PFC nor Abrams reportedly responded to the Beacon's requests for comment.

Zeldin noted on X Wednesday night, "Stacey Abrams' Power Forward Communities received $2 BILLION to be a pass through entity for Biden EPA's $20 billion 'gold bar' scheme."

PFC is hardly the only Abrams-linked organization to find itself at the center of a controversy in recent months.

Last month, two groups founded by Abrams that sided with alleged domestic terrorists in 2023 were slapped with what the Georgia State Ethics Commission indicated was both the largest fine it has ever imposed and possibly also "the largest Ethics Fine ever imposed by any State Ethics Commission in the country related to an election and campaign finance case."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Critics blast liberal reporter for seizing upon hurricane devastation to belittle North Carolinians' beliefs



The Guardian, a leftist publication based in the U.K., is facing criticism over a Sunday article that seized upon the devastation wrought in North Carolina by Hurricane Helene as an opportunity to belittle locals' beliefs, attack President Donald Trump, and push a climate alarmist agenda.

The article was penned by the Guardian's "senior climate justice reporter" Nina Lakhani — a British national who previously suggested that nTrump was a terrorist and a fascist; pushed the Russian collusion hoax; claimed that America's border wall created "environmental and cultural scars"; advocated for banning white men from positions of power; and called the British monarchy a "white supremacist institution."

After insinuating that Trump and Elon Musk were to blame for delayed disaster relief, the Guardian reporter expressed concern that in her travels through Buncombe County, North Carolina, "the climate crisis was largely absent from people's thoughts" in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene.

Resident Twila Little Brave, for instance, told the Guardian about her struggles in the wake of the hurricane, her gratitude about being alive, and how the efforts of her community, not her government, helped her survived the ordeal.

Sharon Jarvis, a 59-year-old woman who lives on a mountain slope on the outskirts of the community, criticized the Biden administration's disaster relief or lack thereof and noted that Christian relief groups, local churches, and other volunteer or nonprofit groups — not the government — stepped into the breach to help.

David Crowder, the pastor at a Barnardsville Baptist church, discussed tough living conditions along with potential threats to local pride and the storm's transformation of the landscape.

Since Brave, Jarvis, and Crowder failed to furnish Lakhani with the talking points the foreign reporter needed for her preferred narrative, Lakhani clumsily shoehorned them into the piece herself with the help of fellow travelers.

'We've failed to communicate this in a way that reaches some of the most vulnerable people.'

Lakhani insinuated that Brave and others who "have found comfort from attributing Helene to God's will" were ignoramuses, noting that "the science is clear: the intensity of the wind and rain during Helene was supercharged by the climate crisis, and the frequency and severity of such storms will increase as the planet continues to warm — driven by the world's dependence on the burning of fossil fuels."

While dismissive of locals' religious beliefs, Lakhani appeared more than willing to accept as gospel truth an assertion from Thomas Karl, the former head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Centers for Environmental Information, that might rely on misleading and inaccurate claims.

Lakhani shared Karl's belief that "these events will become more intense and stronger. But somehow we've failed to communicate this in a way that reaches some of the most vulnerable people, while they're getting false information from places they trust."

The government watchdog group Protect the Public's Trust noted in a complaint last year that the NOAA's Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters tracking project relies on economic data and cannot as a consequence "distinguish the effect of climate change as a factor on disaster losses from the effect of human factors like increases in the vulnerability and exposure of people and wealth to disaster damages due to population and economic growth."

'This is a vile, mean-spirited article.'

The so-called Billions Project not only has been been cited in over 1,200 articles but has been characterized by the U.S. Global Change Research Program as a "climate change indicator" and had its data cited in 2023 as evidence that "extreme events are becoming more frequent and severe" in the same federal program's "Fifth National Climate Assessment."

Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. noted in a study published June in the Springer Nature journal npj Natural Hazards:

NOAA incorrectly claims that for some types of extreme weather, the dataset demonstrates detection and attribution of changes on climate timescales. Similarly flawed are NOAA's claims that increasing annual counts of billion dollar disasters are in part a consequence of human caused climate change. NOAA's claims to have achieved detection and attribution are not supported by any scientific analysis that it has performed.

Despite outstanding questions about the veracity of claims of intensifying weather, Lakhani framed Karl's statement as the "clear science," then echoed his concern about the germination of alternate viewpoints regarding the storm and broader weather patterns.

Lakhani complained that "false rumors and conspiracy theories," as well as "fossil fuel-friendly" narratives, appear "to resonate among even those directly hit by floods and fires."

When criticizing so-called "disinformation," Lakhani turned to a fellow traveler to shore up her narrative — Sean Buchan, the so-called research director at the leftist censorship outfit Climate Action Against Disinformation.

Buchan appeared to insinuate that rural North Carolinians and other disaster-struck Americans were not smart enough to grasp "climate science" because it is "complicated and nuanced and requires patience." As a result of locals' supposed inability to understand what he and Lakhani believe to be true, Buchan suggested that "propagandists and bad actors will show up in person or online to fill the information vacuum."

Matt Van Swol, a former nuclear scientist at the U.S. Department of Energy's Savannah River National Laboratory, called the Guardian article "absolutely disgusting."

"This is a vile, mean-spirited article from The Guardian," continued Van Swol. "Everything mountain-folk HATE about big city reporters is covered in this article."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

EXCLUSIVE: Mark Green Unveils Bill To Shield American Land From ‘Environmental Zealots,’ ‘Foreign Adversaries’

'Terrible deal for Americans'