Political Voice

Defending the Separation of Laws! Keep Fanatics Off OUR Constitution!

Climate Change Policies Are Good For the Economy

Climate deniers are afraid that people will lose jobs, but I don’t feel that to be true.  When a nation gets together to do something they create jobs and invent new things for the better of the country.  New jobs will also be created for greener energy, and companies don’t want to change because their CEO’s will lose money in their pockets, it’s these people who are funding research that has no scientific bases to their theories with regard to climate change.  They won’t lose money if they change the way they do things.

They dispute the evidence we have to prove climate change, but they bring nothing to the table to prove otherwise. 

The Economic Case for Slashing Carbon Emissions

The climate change news from Washington is cautiously encouraging. No one in power is listening to the climate skeptics any more; the economic stimulus package included real money for clean energy; a bill capping U.S. carbon emissions emerged, battered but still standing, from the House of Representatives, and might even survive the Senate. This, along with stricter emission standards in Europe and a big push for clean energy and efficiency standards in China, provides grounds for hope for genuine progress on emissions reduction.

But while climate policy is finally moving forward, climate science is moving faster. One discovery after another suggests the world is warming faster, and climate damages are appearing sooner, than anyone had expected. Much of the policy discussion so far has been aimed at keeping the atmospheric concentration of CO2 below 450 parts per million (ppm) – which was until recently thought to be low enough to prevent dangerous levels of warming. But last year, James Hansen, NASA’s top climate scientist, argued that paleoclimatic evidence shows 450 ppm is the threshold for transition to an ice-free earth. This would imply a catastrophic rise in sea levels, eventually flooding all coastal cities and regions.

The outliers are the handful of private consultant studies funded by partisan lobbying groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. Using proprietary models (or their own adaptations of standard models), and pessimistic economic assumptions, these studies forecast that even mild U.S. proposals, such as last year’s Lieberman-Warner bill, would cost many thousands of dollars per household and would cause widespread unemployment and economic dislocation. An analysis by journalist Eric Pooley documents the excessive, often uncritical attention given to these studies by the media.

October 28, 2009 Posted by | Rant | , , , , | Leave a comment