Proponents of the AGW theory have always viewed the United Nations as a sterling example of action at any cost. The UN's IPCC, chaired by Rajendra Pachauri, an Indian economist with no formal climatology training, has made extraordinary demands, such as suggesting that the world's citizens give up meat consumption to fight climate change.
Perhaps, those who believe that we must sacrifice the standard of living of our citizens to stop theoretical climate change should now look to the U.S. for guidance.
The Democratic controlled Congress is currently considering the Waxman-Markey bill, a measure praised by President Obama. Obama states that the bill will "create millions of new jobs all across America." However, the bill will likely increase yearly power bills of the average U.S. citizen by as much as $1,600, according to the US News & World Report. Further, it will like have deleterious effects on American agriculture.
The bill seeks to replace carbon taxes with a "free market" where carbon credits are auctioned and traded. The government says the bill will create a $60B USD artificial "free market" and will cut carbon emissions by 15 percent by 2020.
However, the Congressional Budget Office warns that the cost of this market will be "passed along to consumers of energy and energy-intensive products." The CBO says that the bill will particularly impact low income households.
Gary Swan, Director of Governmental Affairs and Communications with the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau, says the bill will spell disaster for hard-working farmers as well. States Swan, "On average, 65 percent of farmers' input costs are fuel, electricity, fertilizer and chemicals."
According to the Heritage Foundation, under the bill gasoline and diesel costs would grow 58 percent by 2035. This, combined with higher prices on farm equipment, would drop farm profits by 28 percent by 2012 and by 57 percent by 2035.
The Heritage Foundation estimates that the bill will leave America $9.4 trillion poorer by 2035. AGW supporters, though, argue that Americans must endure any amount of pain and economic hardship in years ahead to stop climate change.
Meanwhile, the accuracy of AGW theory continues to be debated. Several recent studies have suggested that the sun may have a larger role than man in climate change. Even a 2008 NASA study acknowledged that the solar activity caused past climate change, though it failed to make the easy connection between the sharp increase in solar activity in the 1990s to current climate change.
In other news, alarmists now a new fear to race to prevent -- French astronomers using "arcane math" methods predicted that there's a 1 in 100 chance that the Earth could collide with Mars in the next 5 billion years.
quote: consumption will drop and the country as a whole will become wealthier, not poorer, because less money is being literally burned paying for fuels and energy.
quote: albeit within the government.
quote: Think about it - if electricity costs 4x what it currently does, a LOT more people are going to buy energy-saving light bulbs and high efficiency air conditioners over the following few years because it makes economic sense, and this reduces total consumption.
quote: So while people have less money due to sky high energy costs they're simultaneously going to go out and buy energy efficient appliances?
quote: $9.4 trillion is a lot...but its not like this money is going to evaporate into thin air. SOMEONE is going to get it.
quote: This bill may redistribute wealth, but it won't destroy it as the article implies.
quote: redistribute wealth to poor people