www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming

 

Obama Is Out of Touch with Science and the People

 

President Obama wants CO2 declared to be a danger to the public. He wants Congress to draft and pass legislation that would cut greenhouse gases by 80% of 1990 levels by 2050, threatening to use authority under the Clean Air Act if legislators don't move fast enough or create strong enough provisions. Obama wants a CO2 cap-and-trade system put in place with “an economy-wide law - instead of just some major emitting sectors - and to auction off 100% of the emission credits, which analysts say could exponentially increase the cost of emitting, as well as the pay-off for low-carbon projects” [http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200902221138DOWJONESDJONLINE000312_FORTUNE5.htm] Industry fears it could shut down the economy, not only preventing plants from operating and spurring a dramatic retooling of the energy sector but also pushing up costs and hurting the international competitiveness for a raft of sectors”.

 

Obama says he wants to reduce CO2 in because “Few challenges facing America -- and the world – are more urgent than combating climate change” [http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/obama_addresses_5.html]. (That report also states:”The United Nations reported on Monday that carbon emissions from industrialized countries stabilized in 2006 after six years of growth“). The following figure shows the satellite global temperature data for the lower troposphere since the beginning of satellite measurements in 1979 (left) [http://icecap.us/images/uploads/ThereWasNoGlobalWarmingBefore1997(February15th2009).pdf]

and since 2002 (right).

 

 

 

 

See the Regional Summary on the United States (http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/RS_UnitedStates.htm) for details on climate change in the US.

 

Not only is Obama out of touch with science but so is his “energy czar” Carol Browner. She is on the board of directors of PAX, about which she said: “The explosive growth in environmental commodities trading will result in a greater need for market oversight. ... APX is a world-class environmental infrastructure company with a long history of public-private partnerships, and I look forward to helping them capitalize on the full potential of these markets.”  (See: www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/Browner.htm).

 

What do people think? According to a national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Jan. 7-11 [http://people-press.org/report/485/economy-top-policy-priority], global warming is the least of the concerns of the American people. Keep in mind that the Pew Charitable Trusts runs the Pew Center on Global Climate Change (whose slogan is “Working Together…Because Climate Change is Serious Business”) and the Pew Campaign on Global Warming (which promotes “mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions” and “national climate policies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions across all economic sectors”) [http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_category.aspx?id=112]  The following figure is from the Pew survey mentioned above. It shows that global warming is at the bottom of the list of concerns. If Pew wasn’t promoting global warming alarmist fears it wouldn’t even be that high up on the list.

 

 

 

So why is Obama so out of touch with the people? -- Because CO2 cap-and-trade represents big bucks for the government. “Obama promised (again) that "95% of working families" would not see their taxes rise by "a single dime," his own budget reveals that taxes will rise for 100% of everyone for the sake of global warming.

Obama’s budget "climate revenues section, where the White House discloses that it expects $78.7 billion in new tax revenue in 2012 from its cap-and-trade program. The pot of cash grows to $237 billion through 2014, and at least $646 billion through 2019. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123569802712289113.html] “The Congressional Budget Office estimates that cap-and-trade taxes would actually throw off as much as $300 billion every year -- not merely $78.7 billion -- and in a footnote the Obama budget implicitly acknowledges that its $645.7 billion estimate is a lowball”.

 

Obama’s Energy Secretary Steven Chu states the obvious: “The concern about cap-and-trade in today’s economic climate,” Dr. Chu said, “is that a lot of money might flow to developing countries in a way that might not be completely politically sellable.” … and … “reaching agreement on legislation to combat climate change would be difficult in the current recession because any scheme to regulate greenhouse gas emissions would probably cause energy prices to rise and drive manufacturing jobs to countries where energy is cheaper.” [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/12/us/politics/12chu.html?em]

 

Would the reduction of CO2 emissions in the US even have an effect on global CO2 levels?

 

A study published in 2008 reports that China became the largest emitter of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion and cement production in 2006. (Gregg, J. S., R. J. Andres, and G. Marland, “China: Emissions pattern of the world leader in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption and cement production”, Geophysical Research Letters 35, 2008) [http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2008/2007GL032887.shtml]. The following figure is from that study and compares the monthly carbon emissions for the US and China for 2001 – 2007. The study states: “the annual emission rate in the US has remained relatively stable between 2001–2006 while the emission rate in China has more than doubled.

 

 

China – the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter – released its plan on climate change in 2007, supporting the rights of developing nations to pursue growth. The Chinese spokesman said "The consequences of inhibiting their development would be far greater than not doing anything to fight climate change … our general stance is that China will not commit to any quantified emissions reduction targets". [www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2575639,00.html 

 

In July 2008 The Government of India published a National Action Plan on Climate Change, which states: "No firm link between the documented [climate] changes described below and warming due to anthropogenic climate change has yet been established." India is taking a pragmatic approach and has no intention of cutting CO2 emissions if to do so affects its economic growth. The report Overview states: "India is determined that its per capita greenhouse gas emissions will at no point exceed that of developed countries even as we pursue our development objectives." [pmindia.nic.in/Pg01-52.pdf] 

 

Russia also disagrees with the politicized western view. "Russian critics of the Kyoto Protocol … say that the theory underlying the pact lacks scientific basis. When President Vladimir Putin was weighing his options on the Kyoto Protocol the Russian Academy of Sciences strongly advised him to reject it as having "no scientific foundation."" Russian scientists state: "There is no proven link between human activity and global warming. This problem is overshadowed by many fallacies and misconceptions that often form the basis for important political decisions" and "The current warming is evidently a natural process and utterly independent of hothouse gases". [http://www.hindu.com/2008/07/10/stories/2008071055521000.htm]