The Obama administration and congressional Democrats have proposed a major cap-and-trade system aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Scientists agree that CO2 emissions around the world could lead to rising temperatures with serious long-term environmental consequences. But that is not a reason to enact a U.S. cap-and-trade system until there is a global agreement on CO2 reduction.
[...]
The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that the resulting increases in consumer prices needed to achieve a 15 percent CO2 reduction — slightly less than the Waxman-Markey [bill's] target — would raise the cost of living of a typical household by $1,600 a year. Some expert studies estimate that the cost to households could be substantially higher. The future cost to the typical household would rise significantly as the government reduces the total allowable amount of CO2.Americans should ask themselves whether this annual tax of $1,600-plus per family is justified by the very small resulting decline in global CO2. Since the U.S. share of global CO2 production is now less than 25 percent (and is projected to decline as China and other developing nations grow), a 15 percent fall in U.S. CO2 output would lower global CO2 output by less than 4 percent. Its impact on global warming would be virtually unnoticeable.
US 25% emissions?
http://www23.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=CO2+emissions
US has 6 Bill t CO2/yr of 15 Bill t CO2/yr total
so reducing to 5 Bill t CO2/yr would amount to a 7% reduction in overall CO2 output – how is that “insubstantial”?
I stand corrected:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment_of_China
shows that wolframalpha left China off the list (quite an omission) since they equal US in CO2 output.
But I still don’t buy the “It’s too big for anybody” argument (we did, after all, back out of the Kyoto accords).
Answer: Yes.
You just have to remember, for greenies, it’s not the reality that counts, it’s the appearance.
“Solutions” don’t have to actually work, but you gain religious faith by doing them and especially by forcing others to do it.
This is why green zealots will pay $20,000 for solar cells that will generate less power than the interest on the $20K, much less the capital and maintenance. And they want you do be just as green, no matter how much it costs you.
Lets see, CAFE adding about 1,300 to car prices and 1,600 to be green. Yep, movin on up. Change in America!
#10, Bingo.
#15, The longer we put it off, the worse it will get. Is it better to spend $1600 per family this year, or double that maybe five years down the road?
Do you realize that $1600 is 3.2% of the average household income in this country?
12% of the country lives below the poverty line. Assuming a four person family made EXACTLY the poverty level in income, that $1600 comes to 13.8%. 13.8%!!!
If you are making $250,000/yr, this is only 0.6%.
Who said Democrats were friends of the poor and middle classes?
So this is the solution to pollution? Force the poor to live in tents and ride bikes everywhere?
If Obama signs this legislation, there should be pitchforks and torches in the streets.
>But I still don’t buy the “It’s too big for anybody” argument (we
Well, if CO2 is going to cause a 4.5 degree increase in temperatures, then having the US adopt an 80% reduction will still lead to a 4.1 degree increase in temperatures. Even if Europe and the rest of OECD90 join in, you still only stop 20 percent of this warming.
The developing world is fast increasing its emissions numbers, and most of the the recommended treaties ignore them. The various global warming activists even set up a website to promote hurting the US – climateethics.org.
Hmmm save the Earth by essentailly killing humanity. Yeah, that’ll work.
The average person breathes out 300 lb of CO2 per year. There are over 1 billion people in India and over 1.3 billion people in China. You do the math on how much CO2 is produced just by breathing in those two countries alone. If you want to do anything with regard to CO2, try sending birth control pills to India and China.
If you believe this CO2 nonsense, then just plant 5-6 trees, that will negate your 300 lb CO2 contribution.
Those dumb Europeans have spent over 100 billion euros on CO2 trading. The countries that they traded with are primarily China (which doesn’t give a damn about this stupid CO2 nonsense) and Russia (which is playing games with Europe’s natural gas supplies).
I want nothing to do with cap and trade, its nothing more than a money transfer scheme. The biggest greenhouse gas is water vapour, not CO2. Hard to believe people that people believe the lies of Al Gorge.
The earth goes thru natural cycles of heating and cooling and short of all out thermonuclear war, man really can’t affect the planet that much. It has been warmer in the past and significantly colder in the past, people have adapted and survived. They will do so in the future.
I have had it with climate alarmists.
Its all a hoax…CO2 is natural…and nature recycles it…plants breathe it in…
Its about control…controlling our lives, regulating our every step, taxing even our breath…its eco tryanny…
Unless the public wakes up soon…we will be a third world nation…we won’t have any industry to cap.
Don’t think that the rich tyrants hate this idea. It allows them to retain dirty polluting plants in poor neighborhoods while they make neat, clean low polluting plants in rich neighborhoods.
Remember, the wealthy always drink from the taxpayer trough first.