Global Warming bill has serious flaws

Posted on June 2, 2008 by

This is a brief reply to today’s Star Ledger editorial in support of “The Climate Security Act” global warming bill (also known as “Lieberman-Warner”).
Speed a plan to fight global warming
http://www.nj.com/opinion/ledger/editorials/index.ssf?/base/news-2/121238138226640.xml&coll=1
My quick objective here is to provide additional sources of information and perspectives on the bill to readers in hopes that any legislation will be strengthened,and the bad provisions abandoned. Although I don’t closely follow the DC scene, it is my understanding that negotiations on major issues are ongoing, and that public pressure can still make a difference.
We agree that the US Congress must act quickly to dramatically cut existing carbon emissions and fund massive new investments in energy conservation and renewable energy sources.
However, this particular bill is deeply flawed, and will not come close to achieving those objectives. Many are demanding “Fix it or Ditch It”
While the approach under NJ’s recent “Regional Green House Gas Initiative” (RGGI) has some provisions that can serve as a model for forcing auction of the emissions credits and reinvesting the proceeds, the Climate Security Act is a scientifically flawed giveaway to polluters under the guise of protection. For a different analysis of the bill, see:
http://action.foe.org/content.jsp?content_KEY=3820&t=2007_Accountable-Government-and-Industry.dwt
For a more fundamental critique of the cap & trade policy, see:
EPA EXPERTS CAST DOUBTS ON GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS TRADING — Verification and Enforcement Challenges May Cripple Global Warming Strategy
http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1038
The Climate Security Act repeats some of the NJ mistakes. For NJ’s RGGI experience, see: Lame global warming bill goes to Governor http://blog.nj.com/njv_bill_wolfe/2008/01/weak_global_warming_bill_goes.html
Subsidies to nuclear power can not be part of the package.

This entry was posted in Hot topics, Policy watch, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Global Warming bill has serious flaws

  1. TomTallTree says:
    June 2, 2008 at 11:50 AM

    Once again Congress wants to set lofty goals with no plan to get there. Industry is the enemy, which means we all are the enemy. It is estimated that every household will pay an additional $8,870 more for energy between 2012 and 2030. Sen Barbara Boxer D Calif. expects a windfall of $1.5 trillion to the government.
    Ask yourself where this money will come from, if you say from your pocket, you at correct.
    Selling carbon credits is just like the selling of “pollution control” credits in the 1980s. Plant A puts our excessive carbon but buys credits from Plant B the result on paper will show both plants meet the required carbon emission goals. In reality Plant A is still dumping excessive carbon into the air.
    One way to reduce excessive gas and hot air is to shut Down Congress.

  2. mh44 says:
    June 2, 2008 at 4:25 PM

    I agree TTT. In fact the windfall or tax receipts for the government may approach 6+ Trillion Dollars. More control of industry by our politicians who will then select winners and losers. It’s a terrible bill that will send even more jobs overseas and raise costs to the US consumer for energy even more. This is the largest tax increase in the US government history.
    The Democrats in Congress are a disaster. No wonder their approval rate is 12%. But it’s all Bush’s fault.
    Remember pay-go… it’s gone.
    Billions in farm subsidies to rich farmers.
    The end of the Bush tax cut that Dems said is for the rich only.
    Government run health care.
    Government run carbon tax.
    And on and on.

  3. peeltheonion says:
    June 3, 2008 at 11:55 AM

    A thorough look at Al gore’s “an inconvenient Truth” by leading scientists in the fields of long range climate, weather, and energy studies have concluded that the data used for it’s conclusions have been misrepresented, or in some cases falsified to obtain the conclusions they wished to get, in order to justify their call for global energy use reduction. What the sponsors of measures using those conclusions fail to mention, is that reduced energy consumption translates into global population reduction (i.e. starvation). At a time when nations across the world are meeting today in Rome at the U.N. (F.A.O.) conference calling for a doubling of global food production to head off a global food shortage catastrophe, one of the key components of that solution must be massive expansion of energy production. Such things as huge water retention and distribution projects in Africa, South America, Australia, and even here in the western and southwestern U.S. will be a crucial aspect of that. Expanded use of nuclear for electric, and high temperature reactors for converting water into hydrogen for fuel, will both break the oil death grip, and allow oils’ use for expanded fertilizer production. Reversing the corn for ethanol swindle will put needed acreage back into grains production, cutting off speculators moves into a scarce grain market. Transportation of materials, equipment, and produce, particularly grains, meats, and foods products will require high-speed rail networks connecting Europe/Asia/theMideast/Africa to get it where it’s needed. Solar’s greatest and most efficient use has been and always will be dollar for dollar, growing food. The U.S. should be helping in agro-industrial skills training following through on John F. Kennedy’s idea of a “food for peace” program as crucial in developing stable sovereign nations and as an extension of the commitment in the preamble of our constitution to “promote the general welfare”. Energy growth will shape how dark the world looks or how bright the future will be starting from now.

Leave a Reply