EPA Pushes USPS To Spend BILLIONS On Fleet Of Electric Mail Trucks

P. Gardner Goldsmith | February 7, 2022
Font Size


Folks in mob-run regions must wonder why thugs and parasites just won’t leave them alone.

Likewise for those victimized by the mob of a different name: the hydra-headed mafia of government…

And now, we get to see internecine mob squabbling, to watch one agency attack another -- all subsidized by us, the real victims, of course.

In this case, it’s the burdensome, annoying, uncompetitive United States Postal “Service” (USPS) versus the constitutionally unfounded Nixon-era Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, which could be called Environmental Shakedown Agency thanks to its long history of dubious “protection” claims” of inflammatory scaremongering, and of attacking innocent property owners who have not harmed anyone.)

The issue is the new “fleet” of 160,000 mail trucks the USPS plans to buy, for a measly $11.3 billion, over the next 10 years.

To the agencies, and at least one “news” source, the issue is not that you really have no choice in the matter, and the issue is not that the EPA really should not exist, or that the USPS has a long history of trying to block competition and was integral in starting the unconstitutional federal stranglehold of air travel known as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) going back to the 1920s.

No. In this inner-mafia squabble you can’t escape.

The issue is over whether the USPS will complete its purchase of fossil-fuel, gasoline-powered trucks or it will bow to the EPA and buy “electric” trucks (powered by fossil fuels burned at plants that generate electricity sent through government-run or government-licensed powerlines).

And it’s all something that one of the biggest “newspapers” in the U.S. blindly accepts as the EPA doing right. It’s “standard operating procedure” for this glorious bureaucracy in its quest to “save” us from the bogeyman the media accepts as real: “Anthropogenic Climate Change.”

Write Anna Phillips and Jacob Bogage, for the Washington Post:

The EPA and the White House Council on Environmental Quality sent letters to the Postal Service on Wednesday that urge it to reconsider plans to buy mostly gas-powered vehicles and conduct a new, more thorough technical analysis.

Ironic that they “sent letters” to the USPS.

Anyway, mild amusement there. Gallows humor, for those of us who are forced to pay for this idiocy.

The dispute over the Postal Service’s plans to spend up to $11.3 billion on as many as 165,000 new delivery trucks over the next decade has major implications for President Biden’s goal of converting all federal cars and trucks to clean power. Postal Service vehicles make up a third of the government’s fleet, and the EPA warned the agency last fall that its environmental analysis of the contract rested on flawed assumptions and missing data.

Did anyone notice how these “reporters” assume that electric vehicles are “clean” power?

As I have noted for MRCTV, not only do electric vehicles get their energy from coal plants, natural gas plants, or, in some cases, wasteful, unreliable, and “carbon-unfriendly” wind, or nuclear electricity plants, the energy has to be sent over dangerous powerlines that can spark fires, then must be loaded into heavy and chemically-caustic batteries, a process that takes a long time (most homes don’t have the right power-input capacity to handle “fast charges” of fifteen to thirty minutes for vehicles, and require slow electric load, taking hours – it remains to be seen how the EPA plans on making the USPS charge its fleet, either with domestic-level charging, or with higher capacity “fast chargers”).

To claim in any way that such vehicles are “clean” is absurd and journalistic malpractice.

It seems that “flawed assumptions” and “missing data” are whatever the WaPo and EPA claim they are. Definitions and terms are malleable, as is “data” when dealing with the political train wreck that is the “anthropogenic climate change” fable.

Continue our intrepid auteurs:

Transportation is the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, and even rising sales of electrical vehicles have yet to make a dent. Electric vehicle proponents had hoped the Postal Service purchase would provide a boost for the industry.

Again, clear-minded folk pause to check the WaPo assumption of the shorthand “greenhouse gas emissions,” when man-made “emissions” of Co2 -- the main gas in question -- have not been proven to be the driver of Earth's climate.

To illustrate how long-standing and erroneous is this assumption, one need only look at Al Gore’s abysmally unscientific 2006 propaganda piece, “An Inconvenient Truth,” and his “temperature graph” scene.

In it, Gore stands before a graph that shows time along the horizontal axis, and allows temps (as supposedly measured during those years) and CO2 as measured in carbon isotopes found in ice-core samples to be charted in different colored lines according to an increasing scale on the vertical axis.

The first problem with the graph is clear to anyone who knows history, and it’s a big “alarm bell” for those who wish to be dealt with honestly.

Gore’s graph is based on the infamous 1999 “hockey stick” graph from widely discredited Michael Mann. Mann, who did much of his work thanks to government-subsidized Penn State and soon was exposed in the “Climategate” emails hacked from the University of East Anglia (emails that discussed data-manipulation to fit the Climate Change narrative), began the left, older, side of the graph such that it did NOT show the earlier, well-known Medieval Warming Period, when, for example, Vikings lived and raised crops in ICELAND. Instead, he started his graph during what was known as the “Little Ice Age” that came after the Warming Period, allowing him and Gore to display what appears to be a stunning rise in temps at a time corresponding to the introduction of the internal combustion engine.

Those of us aware of history recognized shenanigans.

We also noticed that the two “lines” corresponding to CO2 and temperature were assumed to show CO2 concentrations rising, then temps following suit a bit later on the horizontal time axis.

But this is not what actually is in the chart. In fact, if one pauses the film or looks at a screen-shot, one can see the temperature increases preceding the CO2 increases in history, in patterns that would lead any sensible person not only to infer an inverse of his argued causative relationship, but also to realize that the argument that CO2 is a “greenhouse” gas for the dynamic, CO2-using, planet Earth is not supported by the evidence the alarmist present.

But leave it to the WaPo to avoid all of this.

Likewise, leave it to these WaPo writers to pepper their “report” with assumptive wording. For example, they write that the EPA objection came “as a surprise” to USPS officials.

How do they know this? They provide no evidence.

The objections took senior postal leaders by surprise. The Postal Service’s governing board was largely unaware of tension around the environmental impacts of the trucks, according to three people involved with the contract, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The House plans to vote in the coming days on legislation relieving the Postal Service of much of its debt — which exceeds $200 billion — and the individuals said postal officials privately worry that an ugly spat over its environmental record could spur congressional Democrats to delay the vote.

So, as the House plans to vote on whether they will shift much of the USPS $200 BILLION debt onto you and your neighbor, you get to watch as the sophists argue about what color glove to wear as they pick your pocket, or, to put it another way, whether the glove is “carbon neutral.”

And one final note. In the WaPo piece, the writers note that the EPA mob are “policy makers.”

This smacks of the flipside to up-and-coming term “stakeholder,” rolled out by politicians and bureaucrats to rhetorically pick winners and friends in their increasingly fascist schema of handouts and favors, all at your expense.

"Policy-makers and Stakeholders."

You are not a “stakeholder,” and it seems as if Biden and many other politicians want to chain everyone into a federally-controlled electric grid.

It seems as if they consider you a serf. Despite heroic historical efforts to eliminate the USPS, the parasite lives on. And, despite the “anthropogenic climate change” canard being exposed time and again, politicians continue to trot it out.

We will have to expend more human energy to warn others about it.

Related: Inconvenient: Global Temps Lower Now Than When Gore Received Nobel Prize | MRCTV