DOE’s climate report betrays President Trump‘s Climate Agenda
by Dr. Ed Berry
Trump’s choice of Koonin to lead his DOE climate report and the CO2 Coalition to help write it is as dangerous as Trump’s choice of Fauci was to solve the COVID problem.
Trump’s DOE chose Steven E. Koonin to lead DOE’s 2025 climate report.
Koonin was Obama’s DOE Under Secretary for Science. That alone should have prevented Trump’s DOE from choosing him. But it’s worse.
Trump’s DOE climate report assumes incorrectly that Assumptions (1) and (2) are true and the CEP is false. That DOE position will crucify Trump’s climate policy in court. The authors of the DOE climate report cannot change their scientific opinions in court.
President Trump is fighting an uphill battle on climate change because he does not understand the climate science chessboard. Few people do. Trump’s close friends are WEF puppets, and they warm Republican seats in Congress. For example, all of Montana’s US Senators and Congressmen support AG Knudsen’s deliberate loss of the Held v. Montana climate lawsuit, which he could have easily won. (See my posts on that subject.)
This table shows the positions of IPCC, CO2 Coalition, and EXB.PHD on three key assumptions about climate change. Only EXB.PHD supports the truth.
On Assumption (2), the CO2 Coalition says that CO2 causes less warming than the IPCC claims, but less warming is still warming.
Steven Koonin’s 2022 book, Unsettled (page 68), says the following about human CO2 relevant to Assumption (1):
Carbon dioxide is the single human-caused greenhouse gas with the largest influence on the climate. But it is of greatest concern also because it persists in the atmosphere/surface cycle for a very long time. About 60 percent of any CO2 emitted today will remain in the atmosphere twenty years from now, between 30 and 55 percent will still be there after a century, and between 15 and 30 percent will remain after one thousand years.
The simple fact that carbon dioxide lasts a long time in the atmosphere is a fundamental impediment to reducing human influences on the climate. Any emission adds to the concentration, which keeps increasing as long as emissions continue. In other words, CO2 is not like smog, which disappears a few days after you stop emissions; it takes centuries for the excess carbon dioxide to vanish from the atmosphere. So modest reductions in CO2 emissions would only slow the increase in concentration but not prevent it. Just to stabilize the CO2 concentration, and hence its warming influence, global emissions would have to vanish.
Koonin doesn’t discuss the physics of inflows, outflows, or balance levels. He talks about IPCC’s politics of “persists,” “remains,” and “lasts a long time.” That is not science.
Koonin and the DOE climate report say Assumption (1) holds and CEP fails, the opposite of the truth and what’s needed to defeat climate lawsuits.
Here is a quote from the DOE report (below its Fig. 3.1.3 on p 13) that shows it agrees with IPCC’s Assumption (1) and violates the CEP:
The annual increase in concentration is only about half of the CO2 emitted because land and ocean processes currently absorb “excess” CO2 at a rate approximately 50 percent of the human emissions. Future concentrations, and hence future human influences on the climate, therefore, depend upon two components: (1) future rates of global human CO2 emissions, and (2) how fast the land and ocean remove extra CO2 from the atmosphere. We discuss each of these in turn.
The DOE report claims Assumptions (1) and (2) are true, and Trump cannot win by arguing Assumption (3) is false.
Trump’s choice of Koonin to lead and the CO2 Coalition to help write his DOE climate report is as dangerous as Trump’s choice of Fauci was to solve the COVID problem.
Will Happer and Richard Lindzen of the CO2 Coalition are friends of Steve Koonin. The CO2 Coalition’s leaders support the IPCC’s climate fraud, deny the CEP, trash the scientific method, and censor Berry’s breakthrough work.
To save his actions on climate, President Trump must use the Climate Equivalence Principle (CEP) and scientists who support CEP and can prove Assumptions (1) and (2) are false.