Chairman Graves & Chairman Crawford Statement on Court Striking Down FHWA’s Illegal GHG Emissions Performance Measure Rule
Washington, D.C., March 28, 2024 | This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (202) 225-9446
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Sam Graves (R-MO) and Highways and Transit Subcommittee Chairman Rick Crawford (R-AR) issued a joint statement following a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas that the Biden Administration exceeded its statutory authority by imposing a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions performance measure upon the states:
“This was a clear case of blatant overreach by the Biden Administration from the beginning, and we commend the Court for its ruling that a ‘federal administrative agency cannot act without congressional authorization.’ Congress rejected the inclusion of a GHG performance measure requirement when the infrastructure law was developed, making the Administration’s rulemaking an unlawful attempt to circumvent Congress and force this one-size-fits-all burden upon every state and community across the country. We appreciate the ruling and remain committed to ensuring the Administration does not exceed its authority.”
by Amy Mek, an investigative journalist. Eagle Forum Newsletter, January 2024
In order to seize more control of people’s lives, Globalists are pushing the false idea that “15-minute” cities will “save the planet” and help all of humanity.
Fifteen-minute cities are popping up everywhere, and the World Economic Forum is wildly enthusiastic about them. Last year it was announced that Paris, France, would become a 15-minute city, and now the British city of Oxford is next. However, outraged Brits are fighting back.
The Oxford city council has announced that it will divide Oxford into 15-minute neighborhoods, or small 15-minute towns, which are billed as “greener, cleaner and safer.” These new “green” cities, which make services accessible to residents within 15 minutes of their homes, are supposed to “save the planet” and help all humanity.
Instead, they are nothing more than a way for them to restrict, coerce, fine, punish, surveil, and limit the fundamental right of freedom of movement for residents. For example, residents are not allowed to leave their 15-minute city by car more than the government-allotted times a year. Violators will be fined. In addition, the government will track and control your every movement through your smartphones and facial recognition technology.
Flawed climate data used to create 'crisis,' curb your travel freedom
Link to article here.
Scientists Expose Major Problems With Climate Change Data
‘Climate activism has become the new religion of the 21st century—heretics are not welcome and not allowed to ask questions,’ said astrophysicist Willie Soon.
Temperature records used by climate scientists and governments to build models that then forecast dangerous manmade global warming repercussions have serious problems and even corruption in the data, multiple scientists who have published recent studies on the issue told The Epoch Times.
The Biden administration leans on its latest National Climate Assessment report as evidence that global warming is accelerating because of human activities. The document states that human emissions of “greenhouse gases” such as carbon dioxide are dangerously warming the Earth.
The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) holds the same view, and its leaders are pushing major global policy changes in response.
But scientific experts from around the world in a variety of fields are pushing back. In peer-reviewed studies, they cite a wide range of flaws with the global temperature data used to reach the dire conclusions; they say it’s time to reexamine the whole narrative.
Electric Car Drivers: Why You Might Not Be Pumped Over Privacy-Jolting Mileage Taxes By Eric Felten Epoch Times and RealClearInvestigations 8/3/2022
The environmental impact of electric cars may still be unknown, but leaders are growing concerned about the threat they pose to the financing of the nation’s highway system. Because freeways and bridges are funded, in large part, through federal and state taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel, the battery-powered future will test whether roads can just be paved with good intentions.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are trying to devise new ways to raise that fuel tax revenue, which in fiscal year 2020 delivered $35 billion to the federal government and an additional $51 billion to state and local governments. But experts say that proposed fixes to the anticipated highway funding shortfall—involving charging drivers for the miles they travel by tracking their movement—pose a significant threat to personal privacy and liberty.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, passed with bipartisan support last year, authorized the Department of Transportation to launch new pilot programs to test ways to collect necessary fees. These include a range of high-tech means such as accessing location data from third-party on-vehicle diagnostic devices, smart phone applications, telemetric data collected by automakers, motor vehicle data obtained by car insurance companies, data obtained from fueling stations, and “any other method that the Secretary [of Transportation] considers appropriate.”
“Location data”—that is, information about where people are and where they’ve been—“is highly sensitive,” said Lee Tien, legislative director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit that defends civil liberties in cyberspace. It can reveal “what they do, who they’re with, where they worship, what medical procedures they’re having.”
While the infrastructure act authorizes a pilot program to test collecting the personal information needed to charge drivers for their use of roads and highways, it doesn’t answer the far thornier questions about how to protect that data. Will only the feds track drivers? Will each state and locality that currently depends on fuel taxes also monitor drivers? If so, will the data be pooled? Will destinations be tracked along with mileage?
These questions are arising as the Biden administration demands more energy-related data across the board as it seeks to achieve its ambitious climate change goals. The Securities and Exchange Commission, for example, wants almost all U.S. companies to tally and disclose the total amount of carbon emitted in producing their products. The Federal Highway Administration and the Department of Transportation proposed new regulations in July requiring states to measure carbon dioxide emissions “associated with transportation” and report those figures to the federal government. States will be required to establish emissions targets aligned with “national policy” established by Biden’s climate-related executive orders.
Advocates of new highway user fees acknowledge the threat to privacy and promise to find ways to protect sensitive information. Asked about the risks posed by tracking vehicles, Rep. Sam Graves of Missouri, ranking Republican member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, pointed to a previous statement: “For years, I have been talking about the need to eliminate the gas and diesel taxes. It’s time to move this solution toward reality, but in doing so, we must ensure that privacy concerns are addressed.”
The Department of Transportation isn’t taking on these issues from scratch. For more than a decade, DOT has been awarding grants to states willing to work out the kinks in a pay-as-you-go system. Pilot programs have been funded in states such as Minnesota, Iowa, and Nevada. The Nevada Vehicle Miles Traveled Fee Study found “The greatest barrier to public acceptance is recognized as insuring driver privacy to the greatest extent allowed by available technology.”
Asked by RealClearInvestigations about such concerns, a spokesman for the Department of Transportation said, “Privacy is of paramount importance and a requirement that has to be addressed in the pilot programs.”
Drivers have proved to be accepting of technologies that track travel when they offer obvious benefits, such as skipping toll booths or fighting crime. E-ZPass shares data with “law enforcement agencies conducting criminal investigations in accordance with subpoenas, court orders or amber alerts.”
At Capitol Hill hearings last year, witnesses assured lawmakers that threats to privacy could be overcome. Peter J. Basso, chair of the Mileage-Based User Fee Alliance said, “The pilots are showing the technical viability of a mileage-based system,” and are showing how to address questions of “protection of personal privacy” and “data security.”
But privacy experts such as Theodore Claypoole, an Atlanta lawyer who edits the “HeyDataData” blog, cautions that concerns might increase if such tracking becomes universal.
He said a lot of people do understand they are less anonymous on the road than they used to be. Cars these days come default-set to gather and horde data on their drivers. What app doesn’t reveal its users’ geo-locations? Insurance companies place bugs in some cars to tell what kind of drivers we are. Every day we are stalked by the Billion-Byte Beast, and yet we remain relatively blasé about it. But gathering information on our driving for tax purposes is something different, says Claypoole. It’s the federal government, not businesses, hoovering up our sensitive information. Do we find this more frightening, or less so?
Similarly, once it used to be difficult to collect comprehensive information about someone’s movements. It might take a team of field agents—the FBI has traditionally used five cars to tail a single suspect in an automobile. Surveillance used to have what privacy scholars call “high transaction costs.” Those costs served as a protection of one’s privacy.
The Supreme Court has wrestled with the question of protecting privacy in an age of tracking devices, but hasn’t resolved what happens to one’s personal information when it is being lawfully collected. In a 2012 decision, United States v. Jones, the court considered whether police could place a GPS device on a suspect’s car without a warrant. The court ruled, 9-0, that such tracking was an unreasonable search that violated the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.
But that ruling did not settle the question of what the government could or couldn’t do with the same sort of information when it is, in essence, freely handed over. In a concurring opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that the biggest threats to privacy may come from technologies that invite surveillance: “With increasing regularity, the Government will be capable of duplicating the monitoring undertaken in this case by enlisting factory- or owner-installed vehicle tracking devices or GPS-enabled smartphones.”
It turns out that people are not as quick to give up freedoms as one might think. The Government Accountability Office published a report in January on the state-level user-fee pilot programs. The GAO wrote, “Many state DOT officials told us that drivers felt concerned that a government-administered mileage fee system may track their location and collect personal data.” They reported that “public acceptance of mileage fee systems remains limited by concerns about protecting privacy.”
Recently, some abortion-rights activists worry that states with strict anti-abortion laws might prohibit travel to other states for the purpose of obtaining an abortion. (Missouri has already considered such a law.) Could vehicle tracking be used to identify individuals who cross a state border and drive to the address of an abortion provider?
Privacy advocates suggest that activists may not want there to be digital tire tracks showing them driving to the sites of controversial political rallies such as on Jan. 6, 2021 in Washington.
Convincing the public that the government will protect their privacy and won’t track their travel, the GAO found, made for “major challenges facing mileage fee systems.” Minnesota DOT officials were blunt about the lack of trust people have in the tech-enabled state: The “public does not want governments to have their travel or personal information.”
Privacy advocates tell RCI that sooner or later highway funding will move to user fees—and probably sooner, given the effect electric vehicles will have on fuel tax revenues. And yet, for all the assurances made in pilot programs that privacy will be protected, the public remains unconvinced. Will the government have to change those attitudes, or will rules be made by bureaucrats? Will voters have a say in whether and how their travels are tracked? Or will they find that the decision has been made for them?
Modern cars are smartphones on wheels, but with less protection for your data.
J.D. Tuccille|3.25.2024 Being proved right isn't always fun. Just weeks after my warning in the March issue that our modern high-tech cars are tracking us and sharing data with manufacturers, cops, and parties unknown, came a report of soaring auto insurance premiums because of snitching vehicles. The consequences get worse from there. Fortunately, there are ways to keep your snoopy ride from contacting the mothership.
Your Driving History May Be Transmitted and Stored
"Car companies are collecting information directly from internet-connected vehicles for use by the insurance industry," Kashmir Hill reported this month for The New York Times. "Sometimes this is happening with a driver's awareness and consent…. But in other instances, something much sneakier has happened."
(The Center Square) – AAA’s latest autonomous vehicle survey shows most U.S. drivers express either fear (66%) or uncertainty (25%) about fully-self-driving vehicles.
However, semi-autonomous technologies such as reverse automatic emergency braking and lane keeping assistance continue to drive consumer interest.
"There has been an increase in consumer fear over the past few years," Director of Automotive Engineering Research for AAA Greg Brannon said in a statement. "Given the numerous and well-publicized incidents involving current vehicle technologies – it's not surprising that people are apprehensive about their safety.”
The survey found almost two-thirds of U.S. drivers would want reverse automatic emergency braking (65%), automatic emergency braking (63%) or lane keeping assistance (62%) on their next vehicle.
The company said U.S. drivers also believe AEB will stop the vehicle when another car, children, adult pedestrians,or bicyclists are in front of or behind the vehicle.
However, recent AAA research found reverse AEB systems prevented a collision in only one of 40 test runs in the context of the backing-up scenarios involving a subject vehicle crossing behind the test vehicle and only 10 out of 20 test runs with the stationary child target behind the test vehicle.
Trillions Spent on ‘Climate Change’ Based on Faulty Temperature Data, Climate Experts Say
Meteorologist finds 96 percent of NOAA temperature stations located in ‘urban heat islands,’ including next to exhaust fans and on ‘blistering-hot rooftops.’
To preserve a “livable planet,” the Earth can’t warm more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, the United Nations warns.
Failure to maintain that level could lead to several catastrophes, including increased droughts and weather-related disasters, more heat-related illnesses and deaths, and less food and more poverty, according to NASA.
To avert the looming tribulations and limit global temperature increases, 194 member states and the European Union in 2016 signed the U.N. Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty with a goal to “substantially reduce global greenhouse gas emissions.”
After the agreement, global spending on climate-related projects increased exponentially.
In 2021 and 2022, the world’s taxpayers spent, on average, $1.3 trillion on such projects each year, according to the nonprofit advisory group Climate Policy Initiative.
That’s more than double the spending rate in 2019 and 2020, which came in at $653 billion per year, and it’s significantly up from the $364 billion per year in 2011 and 2012, the report found.
Despite the money pouring in, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported that 2023 was the hottest year on record.
NOAA’s climate monitoring stations found that the Earth’s average land and ocean surface temperature in 2023 was 1.35 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial average.
“Not only was 2023 the warmest year in NOAA’s 174-year climate record—it was the warmest by far,” said Sarah Kapnick, NOAA’s chief scientist.
“A warming planet means we need to be prepared for the impacts of climate change that are happening here and now, like extreme weather events that become both more frequent and severe.”
But a growing chorus of climate scientists are saying the temperature readings are faulty and that the trillions of dollars pouring in are based on a problem that doesn’t exist.
More than 90 percent of NOAA’s temperature monitoring stations have a heat bias, according to Anthony Watts, a meteorologist, senior fellow for environment and climate at The Heartland Institute, author of climate website Watts Up With That, and director of a study that examined NOAA’s climate stations.
“And with that large of a number, over 90 percent, the methods that NOAA employs to try to reduce this don’t work because the bias is so overwhelming,” Mr. Watts told The Epoch Times.
“The few stations that are left that are not biased because they are, for example, outside of town in a field and are an agricultural research station that’s been around for 100 years ... their data gets completely swamped by the much larger set of biased data. There’s no way you can adjust that out.”
Meteorologist Roy Spencer agreed.
“The surface thermometer data still have spurious warming effects due to the urban heat island, which increases over time,” Mr. Spencer said.
He is the principal research scientist at the University of Alabama, the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer on NASA’s Aqua satellite, and the recipient of NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for his work with satellite-based temperature monitoring.
Mr. Spencer also said computerized climate models used to drive changes in energy policy are even more faulty.
Lt. Col. John Shewchuk, a certified consulting meteorologist, said the problems with temperature readings go beyond heat bias. The retired lieutenant colonel was an advanced weather officer in the Air Force.
“After seeing many reports about NOAA’s adjustments to the USHCN [U.S. Historical Climatology Network] temperature data, I decided to download and analyze the data myself,” Lt. Col. Shewchuk told The Epoch Times.
“I was able to confirm what others have found. It is obvious that, overall, the past temperatures were cooled while the present temperatures were warmed.”
He contends that NOAA and NASA have adjusted historical temperature data in such a way as to make the past appear colder and, by so doing, make the current warming trend more pronounced.
Faulty Temperature Readings
The urban heat island effect causes higher temperatures in areas where there are more buildings, roads, and other forms of infrastructure that absorb and then radiate the sun’s heat, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
The agency estimates that “daytime temperatures in urban areas are 1–7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than temperatures in outlying areas, and nighttime temperatures are about 2–5 degrees Fahrenheit higher.”
Consequently, NOAA requires all its climate observation stations to be located at least 100 feet away from elements such as concrete, asphalt, and buildings.
However, in March 2009, Mr. Watts released a report that shows that 89 percent of NOAA’s stations had heat bias issues due to being located within 100 feet of those elements, and many were located by airport runways.
“We found stations located next to the exhaust fans of air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering-hot rooftops, and near sidewalks and buildings that absorb and radiate heat,” Mr. Watts said.
“We found 68 stations located at wastewater treatment plants, where the process of waste digestion causes temperatures to be higher than in surrounding areas.”
The report concluded that the U.S. temperature record was unreliable, and because it was considered “the best in the world,” global temperature databases were also “compromised and unreliable.”
Following the report, the U.S. Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the Government Accountability Office confirmed Mr. Watt’s findings and stated that NOAA was taking steps to address the issues.
“NOAA acknowledges that there are problems with the USHCN data due to biases introduced by such means as undocumented site relocation, poor siting, or instrument changes,” the OIG report reads.
“All of the experts thought that an improved, modernized climate reporting system is necessary to eliminate the need for data adjustments.”
Despite the assurances, Mr. Watts had doubts about NOAA addressing the issues and in April 2022 and May 2022, he and his team revisited many of the same temperature stations they had observed in 2009.
He published his findings in a new study on July 27, 2022. It found that even more, approximately 96 percent, of NOAA’s temperature stations still failed to meet its own standards.
“There are two main biases in the surface temperature network for the United States, and most likely the world, that I have identified,” Mr. Watts said.
“The biggest bias is the urban heat island effect. What happens is that because heat is retained by the surfaces and released into the air at night, the night’s low temperature is not as low as it could be if the thermometer were outside of town and in a field.”
Global average surface temperatures have been variable, but show an increasing trend in recent decades. (Illustration by The Epoch Times)
Over the years, he said, more and more infrastructure has been built up around the thermometer locations, and at night, the asphalt and concrete release the absorbed heat and push up the temperature.
“You can look at any set of climate data, no matter who produces it, and you can see this effect. The low temperatures are trending upward much faster, and the high temperatures are virtually unchanged. But it’s the average temperature that’s being used to track climate change,” Mr. Watts said.
He said that even though both NOAA and NASA claim that they can adjust their data to account for the urban heat island effect, the bias is impossible to overcome because the problem impacts 96 percent of surface stations.
He said the few thermometers located at climate stations not experiencing a heat bias show half the rate of warming currently being reported.
Transient Temperature
The second primary bias that Mr. Watts identified is the transient temperature readings, which are short-term temperature changes that can give a false reading.
NOAA started switching out their mercury thermometers in the mid-to-late 1980s, according to Mr. Watts.
The majority of its network now consists of electronic thermometers that can measure temperature within seconds.
“But they’re only recording the high and the low temperature of the day, and these can be biased by simple effects of wind,” he said.
“For example, you can have one of these temperature sensors placed near a parking lot, which happens to be to the east of the thermometer. And the wind has been predominantly from the south all through the day. But then, all of a sudden, you get a wind shift, and the wind shift could be caused by a number of different things. It could be caused by a change in the weather patterns. It could be caused by something blocking the wind from the south, like a semi-truck pulling up nearby.
“So you get wind shifting out of the east suddenly, coming across the parking lot, and picking up that radiant heat. And the thermometer will respond to that in the space of a second or two. And it will report a high temperature from that wind gust that does not necessarily represent the weather that day. It’s an anomaly. And the same thing can happen at night.”
Mr. Watts said transient temperature is such a well-known problem that the Met Office in the UK and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology have abandoned their high-tech network and are retooling to get more accurate readings.
“These are the problems that NOAA has not really fully addressed,” he said. “The folks who do the climate data never leave the office, and they don’t administer these stations. They [the stations] are left to the National Weather Service field offices—and the National Weather Service field offices are understaffed.
“Some stations, like out here in the West, are hundreds of miles away or more from the National Weather Service office, so they can’t get out there and do maintenance regularly. And when the National Weather Service went to modernization in the early 1990s, they closed many Weather Service offices around the country.
“And so, the maintenance on these thermometers—and a lot of these monitors are run by the public, a lot are volunteers—has fallen off. I’ve had volunteers, when I go visit, ask me if I can get the Weather Service to come out and fix something. But they can’t, because the problem is, they don’t have the budget.
“The bottom line is that the Cooperative Observer Network, the COOP network—it’s literally a ragtag bunch of volunteers combined with some public agencies, such as police stations, fire stations, forest service, and so on.
“This is not a rigorously scientifically controlled network at the operational level.”
NOAA itself stated on its website that its temperature readings aren’t precise and that the agency adds a margin of error to its temperatures.
Neither NOAA nor NASA responded by press time to The Epoch Times’ request for comment regarding transient temperature anomalies or Mr. Watts’s claim that adjusting for a heat bias is impossible.
Adjusting Temperature Readings
NOAA has also been adjusting historical temperature data.
“Normally, when correcting data errors, you would expect a more random result in the data adjustments—both up and down—but the results instead show a systematic process of cooling the past and warming the present,” Lt. Col. Shewchuk said.
An example is Iceland’s Reykjavik station.
The February 1936 record for the Reykjavik station showed a mean temperature of minus 0.2 degrees Celsius for the month and an annual mean temperature of 5.78 degrees Celsius, according to the Goddard Institute for Space Studies Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP). The original GISTEMP monthly data was known as v2, or version 2.
EPA data shows an increasing ratio of daily record high-to-low temperatures in order to indicate rising global temperatures (Illustration by The Epoch Times).
In 2019, NOAA released an updated version of its software, GISTEMP v4.
It shows Reykjavik station’s mean temperature for February 1936 as minus 1.02 degrees Celsius, and the annual mean temperature as 5.01 degrees Celsius. That’s a downward adjustment of 0.82 degrees Celsius for the month and 0.77 degrees Celsius for the year after the software update.
When comparing the GISTEMP v2 monthly data against the v4 monthly data, an overall cooling of the past is observed.
“Incredibly, the range of data adjustments exceeds 2 degrees Fahrenheit, which is significant with respect to current temperature trends,” Lt. Col. Shewchuk said.
“NOAA also employs a very unusual follow-on data adjustment process, where they periodically go back and re-adjust the previously adjusted data. This makes it difficult to find ground truth, which seems more like shifting sands.”
In response to The Epoch Times’ request for comment about the adjustments to historical data, NOAA’s public affairs officer, John Bateman, said he reached out to one of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) climate experts, who responded: “NCEI applies corrections to account for historical changes in station location, temperature instrumentation, observing practice, and, to a lesser extent, siting conditions. Our approaches are documented in the peer-reviewed literature. At the national scale, the corrected data are in good agreement with the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), which has pristine siting conditions.”
NASA didn’t respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment about adjustments to historical data.
Satellite Readings
To get a more accurate reading of the Earth’s fluctuating surface temperatures, Mr. Spencer and climatologist John Christy developed a global temperature data set from microwave data observed from satellites.
Mr. Christy is a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and director of the Earth System Science Center, who, along with Mr. Spencer, received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for his work with satellite-based temperature monitoring.
They started their project in 1989 and analyzed data going back to 1979.
According to satellite data, since 1979, the Earth’s temperature has been increasing at a steady rate of 0.14 degrees Celsius every 10 years.
And while 2023 was the hottest year on record due to linear warming trends, they say it’s not a cause for public panic.
“Yes, it appears 2023 was the warmest in the last 100 years or so. But numbers matter. The magnitude isn’t large enough for anyone to feel,” Mr. Spencer said.
“Besides, a single year is weather, not climate. What matters is the long-term trend, say many decades.”
He said the 2023 data, added to the 45 years of data since 1979, doesn’t alter the overall trend of 0.14 degrees Celsius increase every 10 years
“I believe both satellites and thermometers show a warming trend, especially since the 1970s,” Mr. Spencer said.
“But the strength of that trend is considerably less than what climate models predict, and it is those models which are used to argue for changes in energy policy and CO2 emissions reduction.”
Lt. Col. Shewchuk agreed that satellite-based temperature data is more precise, and it shows a much smaller warming trend than NOAA’s surface-based warming trend.
“The satellite data are a better measure of global temperature change because [they] do not suffer from conventional surface temperature station location problems or the numerous forms of NOAA data editing activities,” he said.
Satellite readings are also “routinely calibrated to radiosonde (weather balloon) data, which are the gold standard for atmospheric data.”
Mr. Spencer published a report on Jan. 24 that addresses inaccuracies in climate modeling.
“Warming of the global climate system over the past half-century has averaged 43 percent less than that produced by computerized climate models used to promote changes in energy policy,” the report reads.
“Contrary to media reports and environmental organizations’ press releases, global warming offers no justification for carbon-based regulation.”
Mr. Spencer said the public has been led to believe that modeling is “fairly accurate,” but a number of additional variables have been added to the modeling that result in higher temperature estimates.
“Current claims of a climate crisis are invariably the result of reliance on the models producing the most warming, not on actual observations of the climate system which reveal unremarkable changes over the past century or more,” he wrote.
NASA Props Up Ground Readings
NASA claims on its website that ground thermometers are more accurate than satellite measurements.
“While satellites provide valuable information about Earth’s temperature, ground thermometers are considered more reliable because they directly measure the temperature where people reside,” NASA stated.
“Satellite data require complex processing and modeling to convert brightness measurements into temperature readings, making ground thermometers a more direct and accurate source of temperature information for us.”
Mr. Spencer quickly pointed out the flaws in NASA’s claim.
“Surface thermometers only cover a tiny fraction of the Earth, whereas the satellites provide nearly complete global coverage,” he said.
“NASA’s complaint that the 16 separate satellites must be pieced together ‘like a jigsaw puzzle’ is ironic since the surface temperature record is pieced together from hundreds (if not thousands) of stations, with almost none of them, anywhere, providing a continuous, uninterrupted record unaffected by increasing urban heat island effects.
“Finally, the complaint is that satellites only measure the deep atmosphere, not the surface where people live. ... Well, if that is so, why are deep ocean temperatures touted as being so valuable for climate research? All of these measurements are important in their own right, and each system has its strengths and weaknesses. Our satellite dataset is widely used by climate researchers around the world.”
As to NASA’s critique that satellites don’t directly measure temperature but instead the brightness of Earth’s atmosphere, making them inaccurate, Mr. Spencer said: “Strictly speaking, that is true. But surface thermometers are electronic, so (technically) they measure electrical resistance.
“The satellites are calibrated with the highest quality, laboratory-standard platinum resistance thermometers. If NASA is going to fault remotely-sensed satellite data, they might as well shut down their myriad Earth satellite programs, which have the same (supposed) ‘defect.’”
Lt. Col. Shewchuk called NASA’s claim that satellite data is inferior to surface temperature readings “nonsense.”
“UAH satellite data is the only data source that is truly global in nature. It effectively measures the temperature of earth’s entire atmosphere, and especially the lower troposphere—where our weather is actually created,” he said.
“The only limitation is that the satellite data only begins in 1979.”
Mr. Watts said that when he looked at data from ground surface stations in grassy fields (absent an urban heat island effect), the temperature readings closely matched Mr. Spencer’s satellite data.
When asked why NOAA isn’t only using thermometers where there’s no possibility for an urban heat island effect, Mr. Spencer said: “I think their goal is not to get the most accurate long-term temperature record but to use as much thermometer data as they can get their hands on. This is good to build a congressionally-funded program and keep people employed.”
The current amount of money, $1.3 trillion annually, being spent on climate initiatives is nowhere near enough, according to the Climate Policy Initiative.
“In the average scenario, the annual climate finance needed through 2030 increases steadily from $8.1 to $9 trillion. Then, estimated needs jump to over $10 trillion each year from 2031 to 2050,” the group stated.
“This means that climate finance must increase by at least five-fold annually, as quickly as possible, to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.”
The organization lists its funders on its website, including the Rockefeller Foundation, WWF, and Bloomberg Philanthropies. Its partners include BlackRock, two U.N. climate groups, several large global banks, and government groups such as the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy.
Texas High Speed Rail gets resurrected by Biden bailout
Plan: Forcing Texans Into High-Speed Trains
A private Texas high-speed rail venture is resurrected from the dead by the feds.
A long-delayed and over-budget proposed high-speed rail between Houston and Dallas/Fort Worth just received a new lifeline: $500,000 for a feasibility study from you, the American taxpayer, via the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).
According to ReasonMagazine, the company was in such poor financial condition, it couldn’t even pay its property taxes on time.
No matter. It just might be bailed out by the Biden Administration.
Key Facts
Launched in 2013 as a private venture by Texas Central Railway, the planned 240-mile high-speed rail line was anticipated to run at 200 MPH+ between Houston and Dallas/Fort Worth with a travel time of less than 90 minutes.
Initially estimated to cost $10 billion, by 2020 it became a $30 billion project. Texas Central Railway originally committed to constructing and operating the proposed system without public funding and received up to $350 million from Japan Overseas Infrastructure Investment Corporation for Transport & Urban Development.
Now, after the project was seemingly dead, everything is changing.
Texas Republican Reps. Jake Ellzey and Michael McCaul wrote a September 2023 letter to the FRA opposing the grant application:
“By partnering with Texas Central, organized as a private limited liability corporation, Amtrak will funnel federal taxpayer money to a private corporation for what was initially proposed as an exclusively privately funded venture. The project has received fierce pushback from rural landowners as well as county and local governments along the proposed route.”
Background
In 2022, after the CEO left, the board disbanded, and the company is now being managed by FTI Consulting. This firm specializes in “liquidity forecast development, business plan development and analyses, collateral evaluations and recovery assessment and contingency planning,” according to the company biography.
Earlier, Texas Central Railway tried persuasion to buy private property from landowners but has had multiple legal battles with landowners and Grimes County, who refuse to sell their land.
Then, in June 2022, the Supreme Court of Texas, ruled that the company has eminent domain authority on land that is needed to build the rail line. Now, they can force private land owners to sell.
While the company said the project would create 17,000 jobs and have an economic impact of $36 billion, landowners raised concerns about the abuse of eminent domain and questioned how many passengers would use the train.
Re-Route the Route, an advocacy group supportive of moving the rail alignment to a safer location, has opposed it. New studies estimate that only 1.4 million people will ride each year rather than the estimated 5.9 million.
If accurate, the high-speed rail project will never be profitable and will be just another billion-dollar local boondoggle subsidized by national tax dollars.
Critical Quote
“If approved, these applications will result in taxpayer money being used by a private company to take private land from landowners through eminent domain,” Reps. Jake Ellzey and Michael McCaul wrote in their letter to the FRA. “Landowners deserve to have their land rights protected against the unrealistic and financially infeasible rail project proposed to be funded through these applications.”
Summary
For the last decade, this private train project promised no taxpayer funding. But now, the feds are at the table. So here’s the question:
Should taxpayer dollars be pumped into a project that appeared dead in the water, one whose price tag tripled, and whose leaders jumped ship?
ACTION ITEM: Submit comments opposing the Remote Kill Switch
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2022–0079] RIN 2127–AM50
Advanced Impaired Driving Prevention Technology
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
Comments should be submitted no later than March 5, 2024.
Concerns you could raise either as questions or turn into statements of concern along with any of your own:
While this mandate was intended to help detect impaired and drunk drivers, we have significant concerns that the implementation of such a technology mandate will enable the ability to track vehicles and raises significant questions about the implications to constitutional rights and the mechanics of such a system. The potential to misuse this technology to surveil American citizens without a warrant poses a threat to constitutionally protected rights of freedom of association, as well as the protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
The American People need answers about this technology. We have grave concerns about its use against Americans, its safety implications, and potential for being ‘weaponized’ against drivers.
1) There is no definition of “impaired driving’ in statute (or in the Infrastructure Innovation & Jobs Act, known as IIJA). What is the difference between ‘impaired’ and ‘drunk' driving and what law was passed outlawing impaired driving that would allow you to prevent someone from using their vehicle if determined by a vehicle technology to be ‘impaired'? Drunk driving has a legal definition of .08 or above blood alcohol level and can be detected by breathalyzer or blood alcohol test. How would technology in a moving vehicle detect a driver at or above this level?
2) How will this technology work and does it exist presently?
a) Will it observe driver eye and head movement, or the motion of the vehicle, etc. to determine if a driver is impaired?
Read more: ACTION ITEM: Submit...
Deadly toll road: When private companies take over our public infrastructure, everyone loses
TURF's Founder and Executive Director, Terri Hall, was interviewed for this article. We sounded the alarm bells before any of this happened. It's tragic that people have lost their lives over it. We need to steer clear of privatizing our public infrstrutcure for a host of reasons, but this is the most compelling reason of all. Read on.
The sun was sinking toward the horizon when brothers Alejandro and Juan Simental drove their pickup less than 10 minutes from a Motel 6 to their job site: a pricey new toll road they were helping to build alongside busy State Highway 288. A week before, they had left their home in Arlington to work in the flat southern edge of Houston’s suburbs, the bustling intersection of State Highway 288 (SH 288) and Beltway 8. That’s where their employer, Choctaw Erectors, a steel construction company, was subcontracted to help build the Texas Department of Transportation’s latest privately operated tollway.
They shared their no-frills motel room with a coworker, sleeping only a few hours just to get up and work again. Their shifts were punishing—nine to 12 hours, often overnight, seven days a week. But that evening, as the Houston sky gradually dimmed to a streetlight-stained dark gray, Alejandro, Juan, and five others on their crew established a rhythm. Alternating thumps and whirrs sounded as they laid and bolted corrugated metal decking, piece by piece, onto the tollway’s four bridge girders, 85 feet above the ground.
As the sun began to rise on June 21, 2019, Alejandro, 21, who stood around 5 feet 3 inches tall and was stocky like his brother, was working on a section of the bridge just a few feet away from Juan. There were about 15 minutes left in their shift when Juan reached the end of the first girder. Realizing that the 6-foot double safety lanyard he wore, which was tied to a safety line, did not allow him to reach the second girder more than 7 feet away, Juan briefly unhooked the lanyard from his safety harness and walked across the steel decking.
Foreman Jorge Carlos was the only one to hear the scream as Juan tripped and fell 85 feet, head first. Seconds later, realizing his brother had fallen, Alejandro let the metal sheet he was holding drop from his hands and clatter to the ground. He rushed to an elevated boom lift that lowered him to his brother’s side.
Blood was already soaking into the soil. To the west of Juan’s feet lay his white hard hat and his right brown slip-on boot. His black plastic headlamp was still glowing. Co-workers gave Juan CPR. Police arrived in four minutes, the medic nine minutes later. That was too late. At 4:58 a.m., just two minutes before their shift was to end, Juan was pronounced dead. He was 22.
Biden's EV Plan Faces Opposition From Thousands of Car Dealers
An open letter was signed by more than 3,800 dealerships across the country.
By Jack Phillips Epoch Times November 28, 2023
Several thousand car dealership owners around the United States have signed an open letter to the Biden administration, saying they oppose the aggressive push for electric vehicles, in another sign of growing concerns about the market for EVs.
Since taking office, President Joe Biden has signed a number of executive orders to boost the sales of EVs amid proposed changes that seek to reduce the number of cars that produce emissions by 2032. In 2021, the president outlined a plan that seeks to have 50 percent of new vehicles be either plug-in hybrids or fully electric by 2030.
But in an open letter published on Nov. 28, more than 3,800 auto dealers wrote that EV demand isn't sufficient, even as the dealers said they believe that EVs "are ideal for many people" and that "their appeal will grow over time."
"The reality, however, is that electric vehicle demand today is not keeping up with the large influx of BEVs [battery electric vehicles] arriving at our dealerships prompted by the current regulations," the dealers said. "BEVs are stacking up on our lots."
They noted that in 2022, there was considerable "hype" around EVs and that "early adopters formed an initial line and were ready to buy these vehicles" as soon as they were being sold.
Hackers Remotely Kill a Jeep on the Highway—With Me in It
NOTE: We're bringing this 2015 article & video to you to stand your hair on end at the reality we face by the kill switch technology -- both show it can and WILL be hacked and used against you!
Watch this car get hacked & engine shut-off remotely!
Two hackers have developed a tool that can hijack a Jeep over the internet. WIRED senior writer Andy Greenberg takes the SUV for a spin on the highway while the hackers attack it from miles away.
Senate bill seeks standards for cars' defenses from hackers
A few years ago, the notion of hacking a car or truck over the Internet to control steering and brakes seemed like a bad plot point from CSI: Cyber. Today, the security research community has proven it to be a real possibility, and it's one that at least two U.S. senators won't wait to see play out with real victims.
But the security industry has demonstrated that vehicles' increasing connections to the internet create new avenues for attack. Earlier Tuesday morning, in fact, WIRED revealed that two security researchers have developed and plan to partially release a new attack against hundreds of thousands of Chrysler vehicles that could allow hackers to gain access to their internal networks. As part of the same demo, those researchers, Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek, also demonstrated to WIRED that they could use the attack to wirelessly control the steering, brakes, and transmission of a 2014 Jeep Cherokee over the Internet.
END NOTE: Neither of these Democrat Senators would meet with us (or even speak to us) while we were in D.C. They have not re-filed their bill now that the Biden Administration has mandated kill switches be placed in ALL American vehicles after 2026. Partisan politics and a near religious adherence to radical climate ideology prohibits them from now caring about the dangers of this technology being weaponized against drivers, including by the government.
What did taxpayers get from the 88th Legislature on transportation?
No mileage tax, but taxpayers get transportation crumbs and a whole lotta ‘woke’ from 88th Legislature By Terri Hall Founder/Director Texans for Toll-free Highways & Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom (Texas TURF) June 6, 2023
While the 88th regular session of the Texas Legislature has come to a close, what did the taxpayers get out of it when it comes to transportation and toll reforms? In short, not much. Let’s break it down.
It’s easier to say what didn’t pass first since none of our filed bills even got a hearing, except one, much less voted out of committee. No bill to stop remote kill switches going into all cars after 2026 (currently mandated by the Biden Infrastructure bill), no bill to stop road diets, no bill to protect drivers’ right to repair, no bill to take tolls down once the road debt is paid for, and no toll collections/billing reform, with the exception of immediately notifying drivers when there's a problem with your payment card (HB 2170). Get the scoop on all this essential legislation here.
HB 2170 by Bobby Guerra (D-McAllen) was a huge missed opportunity. The grassroots jumped in to ask him to sign onto our broader toll billing reform bill, HB 2991 by Brian Harrison (R-Midlothian), as soon as his bill got filed, but he never did. Then when his bill was heard in committee, we asked if he’d consider substituting our language for his since his bill’s language was already in our bill, and he wouldn’t. Then when his bill came to the House floor for a vote, knowing it was too late to have our bill make it to the floor, he once again refused any amendments to his bill, including a pared-down version just capping the toll fines/fees and removing the criminal penalty. He refused to budge.
TURF Founder/Director & Texans for Toll-free Highways Founder, Terri Hallwas interviewed in this story.
Despite this coverage in the press, none of our toll billing reform bills passed, although HB 2170 (Guerra) was a good start and contained language from our reform bill, HB 2991 (Harrison).
Radical climate agenda passing in Republican House
How Democrats are passing radical climate policies in Republican House
By Terri Hall, Founder/Director, Texas TURF & Texans for Toll-free Highways May 2, 2023 Texas Scorecard
When Texas State Representative Erin Zwiener (D-Driftwood) filed a bill to place the state of Texas under a mandatory Climate Action Plan, many across the aisle cried foul. ‘That’ll never happen in Texas. We’re an oil and gas state.’
But the radical policies that come along with a Green New Deal-style Climate Action Plan are being quietly chopped up and parsed out to various other lawmakers who aren’t viewed as far Left as Zwiener, which are sailing through the House Transportation Committee with barely a whimper of opposition from Republicans.
Though Republicans hold an 86-64 seat majority in the Texas House, Democrats still chair significant committees, including House Transportation chaired by Terry Canales (D-Edinburg). While Austin’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) includes intentional slowing of speeds for cars and traffic calming measures designed to restrict the free flow of auto lanes, such climate equity plans can also include increasing penalties on speeding and other aspects of driving. For instance, prohibiting cars from pass pedestrians and cyclists without a specific distance as a buffer. Anything to put barriers in the way of free flowing traffic. Houston’s Climate Action Plan also calls for slower speeds and other anti-car measures, with the express intent of getting people out of their cars and into buses or onto bikes.
Read more: Radical climate agenda...
STOP the bill to slow down our highways!
RED ALERT: FINAL vote on HB 2224 today (Thurs., April 20).
The senate bill has already passed. If we don't stop HB 2224, it will become law as of Sept. 1!
Call your Texas State Representative and tell them to vote 'No!' on HB 2224. Capital switchboard: (512) 463-4630. They can tell you who your state rep. is.
What does HB 2224 do?
HB 2224(Hernandez) -This bill would give cities unilateral power to lower speed limits on highways (not designated part of the state highway system) down to 20 MPH if they consider the posted speeds ‘unreasonable or unsafe.’ This language is too broad language, especially considering part two of this bill where it gives cities the authority to change speed limits on the fly without a traffic or engineering investigationto justify it.
These cities could use this language to turn almost any highway into a 20 MPH zone - effectively a school zone. This subsection applies to atwo-lane, undivided highway or part of ahighway.Highways shouldnotbe slowed to 20 MPH!
This is part of cities' push for California-styleVision Zerotraffic calming measures, which have the opposite effect of calming. These techniques intentionally slow down carsto make them miserable enough to switch to transit, walking or biking to get around. This is the stated goal of Vision Zero-style plans adopted by city officials in most Texas cities.
Houston Mayor Sylvester Turneradmits,
"When the buses and the trains are going faster than the cars and the trucks, people will exit the cars and the trucks and use the buses and the trains.”
"Vision Zero concepts have beenadopted by the United Nations (UN) and are promoted under the organization’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and a special resolution to improve global road safety.
"The UN also urges member nations to increase use of public transportation, promote pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes, establish 'safe speed limits' and implement 'speed restricting mechanisms.'"
Austin’s Climate Action Planstates: “We created the plan through the lens of racial equity…” Under strategy #4: “Support locally initiated community events that are car-free andexpand “Slow Streets” programs…” In its bicycle policy is states: “These local, neighborhood streets are naturally more attractive for all cyclists, and can be further improved for people through measures such astraffic calming…”
FHWA defines traffic calming as: “The primary purpose of traffic calming is to support the livability…of residential and commercial areas …These objectives are typicallyachieved by reducing vehicle speeds.” Urge your State Rep. to oppose this bill.
We can keep our streets safe without going toextremes.
Tell your State Rep. to vote 'No' on HB 2224!
John Deere settles right to repair lawsuit with farmers, same issues coming to cars
‘EV Mania May Be Over’ as Car Production Estimates and Executive Enthusiasm Wane: Institute for Energy Research
By Naveen Athrappully Epoch Times
January 21, 2023, Updated: January 22, 2023
A driver charges his electric vehicle at a charging station as the California Independent System Operator announced a statewide electricity Flex Alert urging conservation to avoid blackouts in Monterey Park, Calif., on Aug. 31, 2022. (Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images)
Electric vehicle (EV) “mania” might be at an end, or, at a minimum, easing down, according to research, as concerns about supply chains, lithium sourcing, inflation, and more affect production capacities while customer demand decelerates globally, as evidenced by industry leader Tesla cutting prices in order to increase sales.
In Europe, EV car manufacturers are slowing production due to uncertainties around lithium supply for batteries as well as electric vehicles proving to be expensive for the middle class, according to a Jan. 18 Institute for Energy Research (IER) post. This year, Europe is expected to output 12 million cars, which is a million less than earlier estimates.
The average price of an EV in Europe during the first half of 2022 was 55,821 euros, up by over 14 percent from 48,942 euros in 2015, according to a report by automotive market research firm JATO. An EV in Europe is 27 percent more expensive than a gasoline car. These factors raise an affordability challenge for the sector in a region where EV-adoption is generally more accepted than in North America.
The issue of lithium sourcing, as a challenge for EVs becoming mainstream, was highlighted by geopolitical strategist Peter Zeihan in September last year.
“The lithium comes from one place, and it’s all processed in China. So, just building the alternate processing infrastructure … and by the way, we have to invade Russia too … just to get the materials to do EVs at scale is just laughable for the next decade,” he said at the time.
Meanwhile, in the UK, production estimates for electric cars and vans in 2025 have been reduced from 360,000 to 280,000. Consumers in the UK are worried about the operating costs of EVs since the average cost of charging an electric car has risen by 58 percent since last May.
In the United States, sales of electric cars rose in 2022 by 66 percent compared to the overall decline in auto sales of roughly 8 percent.
The IER believes that “the EV mania may be over or at least slowing” down given interest rate hikes, supply chain shortages, inflation, and restriction on tax credits.
“While some politicians are following in California’s footsteps by banning gasoline-powered vehicles and President [Joe] Biden has a goal for 50 percent of new car sales in 2030 to be electric, those feats may not be attainable due to problems in manufacturing and selling of electric vehicles,” the IER said.
“Range and performance problems still exist making consumers wary. And with escalating electric rates, operating costs may not be less than those for gasoline vehicles as Europe is seeing.”
An analysis by The Wall Street Journal in December shows that drivers of Tesla’s Model 3 had to pay 18.46 euros at a Tesla supercharger station in Europe for a 100-mile drive.
In contrast, drivers in Germany had to shell out a slightly lower 18.31 euros to drive the same distance on a Honda Civic 4-door, which is the Tesla Model 3’s combustion engine equivalent.
Global EV Sales, Tesla Price Cuts
A KPMG survey of more than 910 auto executives conducted last year found that expectations of worldwide EV sales have tempered.
In 2021, auto execs were “very optimistic” about the prospects of global EV sales, expecting the vehicles to capture as much as 70 percent market share by 2030. But in the 2022 survey, the expected market share plummeted to 40 percent at most.
“The closer the expert is to the customer, the lower the EV share expectations seem to be,” says the report. “For example, U.S. executives say car dealers expect EVs to capture 22 percent of the market by 2030, eight percentage points less than OEMs predict,” referring to the original equipment manufacturers.
Tesla has cut prices of its cars by up to 20 percent in Europe and the United States in a bid to boost demand. By doing so, the company is sacrificing some of its profits to raise sales volume.
By reducing prices, some of the lower tier electric car models being sold in the United States will qualify for federal tax credits worth $7,500.
Restricting EV Sales in America
In the United States, some states are seeking to restrict the sale of EV’s. In Wyoming, six Republican lawmakers are pushing to phase out the sale of new electric vehicles by 2035 to protect its oil and gas industries as well as to preserve crucial resources.
In a recently introduced bill, the lawmakers note that allowing the proliferation of electric vehicles at the expense of gas-powered vehicles will seriously affect the state’s economy as well as its communities.
Moreover, the batteries used in the EVs contain critical minerals needed in many other applications. The domestic supply of these minerals is limited and at “risk of disruption,” the bill stated.
In addition to that, these critical minerals are “are not easily recyclable or disposable, meaning that municipal landfills in Wyoming and elsewhere will be required to develop practices to dispose of these minerals in a safe and responsible manner,” the bill adds.
In California, the local administration is pushing for greater use of EVs. However, the state’s poor power infrastructure is raising a question about the possibility of such a transition. In September, California’s electric grid regulator had asked people to avoid charging their EVs so as to avoid outages.
EVs are also seen as some of the least reliable vehicles sold in the United States. According to the Consumer Reports 2022 Annual Auto Reliability survey published in November that looked at 24 auto brands, hybrid vehicles and mid-sized or large and gas-powered sedans are seen as among the most reliable vehicles sold in the country.
In contrast, full-size pickup trucks and electric vehicles were seen as problematic. Owners of EVs reported issues with electric motors, batteries, and charging systems. Out of the 11 EV models in the survey, only four had average or better than average predicted reliability.
Toll tax for every mile coming? States consider mileage tax
Pay per Mile: States Move Toward User-Based Road Tax
Hybrid drivers pay twice
By Beth Brelje Epoch Times
January 16, 2023, Updated: January 25, 2023
Traffic backs up at the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge toll plaza on Aug. 24, 2022. California announced a ban on the sale of new gasoline-powered cars after 2035 in a push to transition to electric vehicles, on Aug. 25, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
With each gallon of gasoline pumped in the United States since 1932, drivers have been paying taxes. The revenue is used for road repairs and public transportation such as train and bus systems.
Currently, the federal government takes 18.4 cents per gallon for gas or 24.4 cents per gallon for diesel. State gas taxes range from a national high of 61 cents per gallon for gas in Pennsylvania, to a low of 8.95 cents per gallon in Alaska.
But environmentally motivated improvements in fuel efficiency and the move to electric vehicles (EVs) translate to less gas sold, resulting in less tax revenue collected.
State and federal governments are looking for a new way to fund transportation. Through numerous studies by transportation organizations, they’ve landed on mileage-based user fees (MBUF); vehicle miles traveled fees; road user charges, or highway use fees (HUF). The acronyms all mean the same thing: Drivers pay a tax for each mile traveled.
Tesla car battery 'spontaneously' bursts into flames on California highway, firefighters need 6,000 gallons to put it out By Carlos Garcia The Blaze January 30, 2023
Sacramento fire officials said that it took 6,000 gallons to put out a fire caused by Tesla car batteries that had "spontaneously" burst into flames.
The official Twitter account for the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District issued a series of tweets documenting the incident near Rancho Cordova in California on Saturday.
"Crews arrived to a Tesla Model S engulfed in flames, nothing unusual prior. 2 Fire Engines, a water tender, and a ladder truck were requested to assist," the department tweeted with four photographs.
"Crews used jacks to access the underside to extinguish and cool the battery. Thousands of gallons were used in extinguishment," they added.
They went on to say that the battery cells continued to combust as firefighters attempted to put out the fire.
Read more: Tesla battery fire...
Like TURF
Follow TURF
Global average surface temperatures have been variable, but show an increasing trend in recent decades. (Illustration by The Epoch Times)
EPA data shows an increasing ratio of daily record high-to-low temperatures in order to indicate rising global temperatures (Illustration by The Epoch Times).
