‘Green Antoinettes’ live large, preach small



Politicians, celebrities, and billionaires who lecture ordinary people about their carbon footprints live by another set of rules. They travel by private jet, dine in excess, and retreat to mansions powered by the very energy sources they want banned. It’s a spectacle of hypocrisy so pervasive, the media barely blinks.

Even scientists who scold the public about emissions fly thousands of miles to United Nations climate conferences — racking up the same greenhouse gases they claim will destroy the planet. This is two-tiered climate morality: Those with power indulge, while everyone else is told to sacrifice. Preaching austerity from a private jet has become the “let them eat cake” of our age.

Hypocrisy that pays

The real question isn’t whether the hypocrisy exists but why it’s so tolerated. The answer, in part, is that too many people have found ways to profit from it — through subsidies, grants, and the ever-expanding green grift.

Families pay more and travel less, while the jet-setters congratulate themselves for ‘saving the planet.’

According to data from Yard, celebrities such as Taylor Swift and Leonardo DiCaprio emitted between 3,000 and 4,400 tons of carbon dioxide in 2022 from private jet travel alone — hundreds or even thousands of times the annual emissions of an average citizen.

For perspective: Bangladesh emits about 0.71 tons of carbon dioxide per person annually. Ghana emits 0.74, Ethiopia 0.13, and Kenya 0.4. A single year of indulgence by an American climate icon outweighs the lifetime footprint of entire villages in the developing world.

The climate elite

Filmmaker Steven Spielberg, who condemns “climate deniers” as morally deficient, has a carbon footprint equivalent to nearly 280 average Americans or more than 2,200 Indians. DiCaprio built his global brand on climate activism — then took a private jet from Europe to New York to collect an environmental award.

If the hypocrisy of celebrities is glaring, the behavior of politicians is worse.

Records show that Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign spent over $221,000 on private jets in just one quarter — even as the Vermont socialist voted for laws that punish fossil fuel use and floated the idea of criminal charges for energy executives.

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Fighting Oligarchy tour, meant to challenge wealth and privilege, relied on carbon-intensive travel of its own. The Bronx Democrat later scaled back her private jet use after criticism — by switching to first-class flights instead.

The priesthood of carbon

At United Nations climate conferences, the hypocrisy reaches liturgical heights. The gatherings are usually held in luxury destinations like Dubai, Glasgow, or Sharm El Sheikh. Each transcontinental flight emits roughly 2 tons of carbon dioxide per traveler — the annual output of a citizen in many poorer nations.

Yet these same scientists and bureaucrats push for energy restrictions in developing countries, demanding that millions forgo affordable electricity to meet arbitrary “net-zero” targets. Their supposed moral authority rests not on sacrifice but on self-congratulation.

RELATED: Airlines and banks admit net-zero promises were pure fantasy

Photo by WILLIAM WEST/AFP via Getty Images

A reckoning awaits

The hypocrisy would be merely irritating if the consequences weren’t so destructive. The push for “net-zero emissions” — a fantasy that defies both physics and economics — is driving up the cost of gasoline, electricity, and food while shrinking personal freedom. Families pay more and travel less, while the jet-setters congratulate themselves for “saving the planet.”

They’re not leading an energy transition. They’re entrenching a new aristocracy — one in which elites keep their privileges while the working class bears the pain in the name of the “greater good.”

The rise of Donald Trump and other skeptics has interrupted this march toward a green oligarchy, but the climate faithful persist. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s alliance with the Vatican to “terminate” global warming is only the latest display of moral vanity.

Eventually, voters will see through this 21st-century version of aristocratic corruption. The public may not wield guillotines, but the electoral version will do just fine. Off with their subsidies!

Democrats, Media Rushed To Blame Deadly California Fire on Climate Change. It Was Actually Arson.

Democrats and media outlets were quick to blame climate change and oil companies for the devastating Palisades Fire that ravaged Los Angeles earlier this year. But that narrative crumbled on Wednesday when federal law enforcement officials charged a man for deliberately starting the fire.

The post Democrats, Media Rushed To Blame Deadly California Fire on Climate Change. It Was Actually Arson. appeared first on .

Pope Leo stuns with CLIMATE RITUAL and anti-pro-lifer comments



BlazeTV host Pat Gray had high hopes for the new Pope Leo, but after he blessed a block of ice at a climate change event and made questionable comments toward pro-lifers, he isn’t so happy with the choice.

Leo made his stance on pro-lifers clear when asked by a reporter how he feels about Cardinal Cupich giving an award to Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who is for legalized abortion.

“Some people of faith are having a hard time with understanding this because he is pro, or rather, he’s for legalized abortion. How would you help people right now decipher that, feel about that?” the reporter asked.

“I’m not terribly familiar with the particular case. I think that it’s very important to look at the overall work that a senator has done during, if I’m not mistaken, 40 years service in the United States Senate,” Leo responded.


“I think, as I myself have spoke in the past, it’s important to look at many issues that are related to what is the teaching of the church. Someone who says, ‘I’m against abortion,’ but says, ‘I’m in favor of the death penalty,’ is not really pro-life,’” he continued.

“So, someone who says that ‘I’m against abortion, but I’m in agreement with the inhuman treatment of immigrants who are in the United States,’ I don’t know if that’s pro-life. So, they’re very complex issues. I don’t know if anyone has all the truth on them,” he added.

“There goes any hope I had for the new pope,” comments Keith Malinak, executive producer of “Pat Gray Unleashed.”

“Drawing that equivalency between killing an innocent baby and a murderer who has killed maybe multiple people — that’s the same thing? You’re not pro-life if you don’t support one and reject the other? What?” Gray agrees.

“I mean, that is a far-left talking point, and it has been for years,” Malinak adds.

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Britain’s Big Brother ID law is the globalist dream for America



On Friday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer stood at the podium at the Global Progressive Action Conference in London and made an announcement that should send a chill down the spine of anyone who loves liberty. By the end of this Parliament, he promised, every worker in the U.K. will be required to hold a “free-of-charge” digital ID. Without it, Britons will not be able to work.

No digital ID, no job.

The government is introducing a system that punishes law-abiding citizens by tying their right to work to a government-issued pass.

Starmer framed this as a commonsense response to poverty, climate change, and illegal immigration. He claimed Britain cannot solve these problems without “looking upstream” and tackling root causes. But behind the rhetoric lies a policy that shifts power away from individuals and places it squarely in the hands of government.

Solving the problem they created

This is progressivism in action. Leaders open their borders, invite in mass illegal immigration, and refuse to enforce their own laws. Then, when public frustration boils over, they unveil a prepackaged “solution” — in this case, digital identity — that entrenches government control.

Britain isn’t the first to embrace this system. Switzerland recently approved a digital ID system. Australia already has one. The World Economic Forum has openly pitched digital IDs as the key to accessing everything from health care to bank accounts to travel. And once the infrastructure is in place, digital currency will follow soon after, giving governments the power to track every purchase, approve or block transactions, and dictate where and how you spend your money.

All of your data — your medical history, insurance, banking, food purchases, travel, social media engagement, tax information — would be funneled into a centralized database under government oversight.

The fiction of enforcement

Starmer says this is about cracking down on illegal work. The BBC even pressed him on the point, asking why a mandatory digital ID would stop human traffickers and rogue employers who already ignore national insurance cards. He had no answer.

Bad actors will still break the law. Bosses who pay sweatshop wages under the table will not suddenly check digital IDs. Criminals will not line up to comply. This isn’t about stopping illegal immigration. If it were, the U.K. would simply enforce existing laws, close the loopholes, and deport those working illegally.

Instead, the government is introducing a system that punishes law-abiding citizens by tying their right to work to a government-issued pass.

Control masked as compassion

This is part of an old playbook. Politicians claim their hands are tied and promise that only sweeping new powers will solve the crisis. They selectively enforce laws to maintain the problem, then use the problem to justify expanding control.

RELATED: Europe pushes for digital ID to help 'crack down' on completely unrelated problems

Photo by Flavio Coelho via Getty Images

If Britain truly wanted to curb illegal immigration, it could. It is an island. The Channel Tunnel has clear entry points. Enforcement is not impossible. But a digital ID allows for something far more valuable to bureaucrats than border security: total oversight of their own citizens.

The American warning

Think digital ID can’t happen here? Think again. The same arguments are already echoing in Washington, D.C. Illegal immigration is out of control. Progressives know voters are angry. When the digital ID pitch arrives, it will be wrapped in patriotic language about fairness, security, and compassion.

But the goal isn’t compassion. It’s control — of your movement, your money, your speech, your future.

We don’t need digital IDs to enforce immigration law. We need leaders with the courage to enforce existing law. Until then, digital ID schemes will keep spreading, sold as a cure for the very problems they helped create.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Airlines and banks admit net-zero promises were pure fantasy



We were promised a “green” utopia, free of fossil fuels, powered by sunshine and breezes. However, the net-zero hobbits living in this imaginary Shire were blissfully ignorant of hard realities dictated by physics, engineering, and economics.

Once trumpeted by corporate giants and governments alike, the vision of a world without greenhouse gas emissions is crumbling. It’s pseudoscience coupled with false assurances incapable of sustaining the weight of one reality after another. Major airlines, energy companies, and financial institutions are abandoning net-zero commitments that were always destined to clash with the demands of business imperatives and people’s needs.

Becoming mainstream again is the understanding that affordable and reliable energy, prosperity, and human freedom are inextricably linked — a non-negotiable connection.

Anti-fossil fuel crusaders assured the public that jet travel could be reshaped through “green” fuel and futuristic aircraft. But in 2024, Air New Zealand shattered that illusion by declaring its 2030 emissions target impossible to achieve.

Another blow to the green version of a Middle-earth fantasy came from Airbus, which pushed into never-never land fantasies with its plans to deliver a hydrogen-powered aircraft by 2035.

The necessary technology simply does not exist — neither for airplanes nor so-called sustainable fuels in commercial quantities.

The airline industry’s capitulation is not an isolated incident. It’s a major domino falling in a long line of corporate and governmental U-turns signaling a great awakening.

Over the past 24 months, major banks and investment firms have staged an exodus from climate alliances, no longer willing to bear the costs or regulatory risks of practices that discriminate against enterprises such as traditional energy companies.

The Net-Zero Banking Alliance, once a beacon of green aspirations, has lost some of its largest members, including HSBC and UBS, and all the largest U.S. banks, among them J.P. Morgan, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup.

The climate industrial complex, through its organs at the United Nations, sought to impose anti-fossil fuel goals on the global shipping industry via the International Maritime Organization. However, in 2025, the United States took a bold stand by formally opposing the IMO’s position.

Across the Atlantic, Scotland made headlines in April 2024 by abandoning its ambitious target to cut emissions by 75% by 2030. At Germany’s Munich Motor Show in 2025, Stellantis — parent company of brands like Jeep, Peugeot, and Vauxhall — declared it would no longer aim to produce only electric vehicles by 2030.

The company called the European Union’s 2035 zero-emission mandate “unrealistic.” Others have cut back or canceled production of EVs, most recently Acura’s ZDX, which was sent packing shortly after the Japanese manufacturer and General Motors ended a joint EV venture.

RELATED: Trump’s climate policy shift could save American farmers from disaster

Photo by JamesBrey via Getty Images

The Science-Based Targets initiative was supposed to be the gold-standard arbiter of net-zero commitments. Yet energy giants like Shell, BP, and Enbridge have quit advisory groups linked to the Science-Based Targets initiative, recalibrating their strategies toward pragmatism in the development of oil and natural gas. BP, for example, slashed future spending on net-zero ventures while upping investments in traditional hydrocarbons by nearly 20%.

All these reversals share a common cause: the profound disconnect between activist goals and economic reality. On paper, it sounds charitable to promise emissions cuts and decarbonized operations by mid-century. However, these pledges assume nonexistent technology, rely on unaffordable energy sources, and require disruption to economic activity that no rational executive team can tolerate. Financial institutions have realized that lending to developers and users of fossil fuels is vital for national security, especially in times of geopolitical uncertainty. Oil and natural gas continue to be essential for infrastructure, industrial processes, and the daily lives of billions. “Green” lending strategies that sounded good at climate summits failed to deliver returns under market pressure.

Becoming mainstream again is the understanding that affordable and reliable energy, prosperity, and human freedom are inextricably linked — a non-negotiable connection. The great climate scare is not ending with a bang, but with quiet, commonsense calculations.

$2.2B green dream fizzles: Obama admin-backed solar plant to close after incinerating birds, missing energy targets



Ivanpah Solar Power Facility — which at one time was the largest solar plant in the world — is set to be shut down after it lasted only a third of its expected life span and reportedly killed tens of thousands of birds.

The Ivanpah Solar Power Facility is located in San Bernardino County, California, and spans "approximately 3,471 acres of [Bureau of Land Management]-managed public land and incorporates three 459-foot tall power towers and 173,500 heliostat mirrors," according to the U.S. Department of the Interior.

'Ivanpah is yet another failed green energy boondoggle, much like Solyndra.'

The New York Post reported on Tuesday that the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility is "set to close in 2026 after failing to efficiently generate solar energy."

NRG Energy, the Texas-based company that was an Ivanpah partner and the largest investor, said in a statement that the solar plant "has been surpassed by solar photovoltaics (PV) due to much lower capital and operating costs in producing clean energy."

NRG Energy estimated that the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility "will begin the process of closing its units in early 2026" after regulatory approval from the California Public Utility Commission.

NRG Energy stated, "Once deactivated, the units will be decommissioned, providing an opportunity for the site to potentially be repurposed for renewable PV energy production."

In January 2025, PG&E announced it would terminate the power purchase agreements with Ivanpah. PG&E determined that "ending the agreements at this time will save customers money compared to the cost of keeping them through 2039."

In 2011, the U.S. Department of Energy under President Barack Obama issued $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees for the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility. When the $2.2 billion Ivanpah Solar Power Facility began operating in 2014, it was the world’s largest solar plant and had an expected life span of 30 years.

Jenny Chase, a solar analyst at BloombergNEF, told Climate Depot that Ivanpah never produced more than 75% of its planned annual electricity output.

The Sierra Daily News reported, "Despite federal support and initial optimism about solar thermal technology’s potential for baseload power, Ivanpah never exceeded 75% of its planned electricity output and continues to depend on natural gas to operate."

Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, told Fox News, "Ivanpah is yet another failed green energy boondoggle, much like Solyndra. Despite receiving $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees, it never lived up to its promises, producing less electricity than expected while still relying on natural gas to stay operational."

Steven Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environmental Legal Institute and former Trump EPA transition team member, warned about climate alarmism.

"Soon we will be looking at failures of larger magnitude than Green New Deal spending. No green project relying on taxpayer subsidies has ever made any economic or environmental sense," Milloy told Fox News. "It’s important that President Trump stop the taxpayer bleeding by ending what he accurately calls the Green New Scam."

RELATED: Liberals' Darling $2.2 Billion Solar Plant Suddenly Needs More of the One Thing You Would Never Expect

The U.S. Department of Energy explained how the solar power plant operates, “Ivanpah uses power tower solar thermal technology to generate power by creating high-temperature steam to drive a conventional steam turbine. Mirrors are used to concentrate sunlight and create steam, which is then converted to electricity.”

The Ivanpah Solar Power Facility incinerated tens of thousands of birds with the concentrated sunlight, the Association of Avian Veterinarians stated.

The solar power plant is "believed to be responsible for at least 6,000 bird deaths each year, as the birds can suffer severe burns or become incinerated if they fly too close to the 40-foot towers that concentrate sunlight from five square miles of solar panels."

The Association of Avian Veterinarians stated, "These numbers are likely an underestimation, as the sight of birds and insects rapidly immolated as they soar too close to the towers, which can reach temperatures of 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, is so common that staff at the plant have a name for them — 'streamers.'"

The U.S. Department of the Interior stated that the "Ivanpah Project has resulted in avian mortality, and, consistent with approved plans, the BLM is actively working with the proponent, [the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service], and state agencies to address those impacts." However, the DOI did not provide an exact number of bird deaths.

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

Biden Climate Adviser John Podesta Appears as 'Expert Witness' in Lawsuit Alleging Trump's Energy Policies Are Killing Children

John Podesta—the Democratic operative who oversaw former president Joe Biden's climate agenda and steered billions of taxpayer dollars to green energy interests—testified for two hours in federal court on Tuesday as an "expert witness" in support of 22 children alleging that the Trump administration has violated their constitutional right to life by pursuing policies friendly to oil, gas, and coal.

The post Biden Climate Adviser John Podesta Appears as 'Expert Witness' in Lawsuit Alleging Trump's Energy Policies Are Killing Children appeared first on .

Trump Should Take Down The American Medical Association’s Licensing Grift

As a government-backed, overtly left-wing monopoly, the AMA no longer deserves a privileged role in the country’s health ecosystem.

Al Gore wrong again: Study delivers good news for Arctic ice trends, bad news for climate hucksters



Failed presidential candidate Al Gore claimed in his 2007 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech that the previous year, "as the Northern Hemisphere tilted away from the sun, scientists reported with unprecedented distress that the North Polar ice cap is 'falling off a cliff.' One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years."

Two years later, the climate alarmist told the Copenhagen Climate Conference that new research indicated there was "a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice free within the next five to seven years."

It turns out Al Gore, whose fearmongering reportedly nets him $200,000 per speaking engagement, was not only wrong about a 20-foot rise in the global sea level "in the near future," polar bear drownings, and the snows of Kilimanjaro, but also about the future of Arctic ice.

A paper published this month in the American Geophysical Union's biweekly peer-reviewed scientific journal Geophysical Research Letters indicated that over the past 20 years, "Arctic sea ice loss has slowed considerably, with no statistically significant decline in September sea ice area since 2005."

This slowdown in the loss of Arctic sea ice was pronounced across all months of the year and could "plausibly" continue over the next decade.

The researchers behind the paper — from Columbia University and the University of Exeter — indicated that even with relatively high global temperatures, "climate modeling evidence suggests we should expect periods like this to occur somewhat frequently."

RELATED: Netflix rebooting 'Captain Planet' to push pagan climate propaganda on new generation of kids

Photo by PABLO PORCIUNCULA/AFP via Getty Images

Natural factors, variations in ocean currents in particular, have a tremendous impact in this arena — accelerating, slowing, or reversing ice loss — and have apparently served in recent decades to offset the impact of relatively high global temperatures.

This natural corrective is all the more critical as humans reduce their emissions.

'Now the [natural] variability has switched to largely cancelling out sea ice loss.'

While the authors take for granted that ice loss over the past 50 years has been driven in part by "human-induced climate change," they acknowledged that there was actually significant Arctic sea ice expansion during at least one other period of increasing anthropogenic greenhouse emissions — from the 1940s to the 1970s.

An increase in industrial aerosol emissions from North America and Europe reportedly helped cool the Arctic in the mid-20th century. The very phase-out of exhaust — particularly sulfur emissions — from ships that some environmentalists advocated for appears to have "contributed to enhanced global and Arctic warming since 2020," said the paper.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Climate Program Office indicated that in 2020, new international shipping regulations "drastically" cut sulfur emissions from ships. The exhaust they previously created — reflective clouds called "ship tracks" — had long reflected sunlight back into space, thereby cooling the planet.

"It is surprising, when there is a current debate about whether global warming is accelerating, that we’re talking about a slowdown," Mark England, the researcher who led the study, told the Guardian.

While willing to admit the alarmism of yesteryear was bunkum, England still was sure to tinge his forecast with pessimism.

RELATED: The climate cult is brainwashing your kids — and you’re paying for it

Photo by Sebnem Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images

"The good news is that 10 to 15 years ago when sea ice loss was accelerating, some people were talking about an ice-free Arctic before 2020," said England. "But now the [natural] variability has switched to largely cancelling out sea ice loss. It has bought us a bit more time, but it is a temporary reprieve — when it ends, it isn't good news."

England emphasized the need to maintain a sense of urgency and alarm, stating, "Climate change is unequivocally real, human-driven, and continues to pose serious threats. The fundamental science and urgency for climate action remain unchanged."

While Arctic ice loss has slowed, the Antarctic has been gaining ice in recent years.

According to a 2023 study published in the European Geosciences Union's peer-reviewed journal the Cryosphere, the Antarctic ice shelf area grew by 2048.27 square miles between 2009 and 2019, gaining 661 gigatonnes of ice mass "with 18 ice shelves retreating and 16 larger shelves growing in area."

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

Back to Gas: School Districts Revert to Diesel Because Biden’s Electric Buses Can’t Be Repaired

The Biden administration awarded Canadian electric bus maker Lion Electric $159 million to manufacture 435 school buses between 2022 and 2024, making it the third-largest recipient of such funding. The company has since fallen into bankruptcy, failed to deliver hundreds of the buses it promised, and warned school districts that its dire financial straits prevent it from servicing those in circulation.

The post Back to Gas: School Districts Revert to Diesel Because Biden’s Electric Buses Can’t Be Repaired appeared first on .