A fool’s errand: Al Gore’s $15 trillion carbon tax to ‘re-engineer humanity’ to save us from global warming
by Fred Palmer | May 9, 2017, 5:00 AM
Al Gore wants to reverse modernity and save the world from itself through an elimination of its fossil-fuel-based energy system. During the final week of April, his newly created Energy Transitions Commission released a document setting forth a fool’s-errand pathway to “decarbonize” the world’s energy system.
If this sounds familiar, it is. Gore’s plan features a new, sophisticated, and expensive public-relations campaign, but it’s all based on his views on carbon dioxide first broached in his 1992 book Earth in the Balance, which he reissued in 2000 for his failed presidential campaign. The subsequent efforts made by Gore during the past 25 years have transformed little from their genesis, and he remains as tragically wrong today as he was when he first surfaced as an opponent of everything linked to carbon-dioxide.
But, don’t worry! The all-in estimated cost to re-engineer humanity is only a mere $15 trillion—enough money to give every man, woman, and child in the United States more than $46,000.
Al Gore has been demonizing fossil fuels and attempting to marginalize all those involved in the traditional energy sector since 1988, the year the climate-change movement was rolled out in Washington, D.C., which happened to correspond with a nationwide heatwave and with Yellowstone in flames. Ever since, Gore’s pathway to political power and personal riches has been a successful one, to be sure, but his multi-trillion-dollar effort today is his most sophisticated effort to date. Unfortunately for him, it will also fail, because what he’s selling in his “new” proposal is bad for the people being asked to embrace it.…
could appease Trump’s climate skeptic supporters
According to The Washington Post , the Trump administration is “exploring the cre
The White House is not considering a tax on carbon dioxide to fight global warming, according to an administration official.
“The Trump Administration is not considering a carbon tax,” said White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters, according to Axios, shortly after Press Secretary Sean Spicer gave an ambiguous answer on the subject when asked by reporters at Tuesday’s press briefing.
“Part of the [National Economic Council’s] responsibility in coordinating economic policy for the President is to listen to a range of viewpoints on various issues,” the official told Axios.
Spicer dodged a similar question in February after reports came out that White House officials met with former Republican officials who pitched replacing federal regulations with a revenue-neutral carbon tax.…
Editor’s Note: For an alternative viewpoint, please see:Counterpoint: Carbon Dividends — the Gipper Would be Proud
Some old-guard Republicans are floating the idea of a national tax on carbon-dioxide emissions. The newly minted Climate Leadership Council (CLC), composed of aged establishment Republicans who’ve seen their stature diminish with the rise of the tea-party movement and election of Donald Trump as president, tried to appear relevant by pitching the worn-out idea of a carbon tax-and-rebate scheme in a meeting with President Trump on February 8.
In exchange for the tax, CLC proposes eliminating nearly all of former President Barack Obama’s climate policies. It’s almost certainly true regulatory greenhouse gas restrictions imposed by the Obama administration distort energy markets more than a straight carbon tax would, but why replace a bad set of policies with a slightly less bad tax? This is not one of those repeal and replace moments. Let’s just get rid of the regulations, full stop, no replacement!
The only reason to discourage the use of fossil fuels is to prevent supposedly dangerous climate change. Yet the best evidence — as opposed to dubious computer model predictions — suggests humans aren’t causing the climate to change in ways that even remotely threaten human health or environmental integrity.
By Thomas Richard
Members of the conservative Climate Leadership Council, half of whom publicly denounced candidate #Donald Trump during the election, visited the White House yesterday to extol the benefits of a #carbon tax. In their view, such a tax would mark the first step toward fighting global warming while potentially gaining new constituents for the party.
The CLC, run by eight old-school Republicans and business leaders, wants to impose a $40 tariff on each ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted through mechanical or industrial policies. In exchange, the administration could cancel some of the most expensive EPA rules.
With friends like these…
And even though the Council’s membership is comprised of GOP loyalists, many made disparaging comments about Trump during the campaign. Henry M. Paulson, Jr., a CLC member and a GOP Treasury Dept. secretary, said he had voted for Hillary Clinton. Three others made critical comments that might also overshadow their case for a new carbon tax.
While most politicians understand that things said during a heated campaign are just rhetoric, it’s a little different when your own party members are voting for or supporting the other candidate. But Trump is not like most politicians and may see things differently. During the campaign, George Shultz, who served as Secretary of State under President Ronald Reagan, told a crowd at the Hoover Institute “God help us” over the notion of a Trump presidency: