New York Won’t Allow Cost Of Green Energy Mandates To Appear On Power Bills
New York Won’t Allow Cost Of Green Energy Mandates To Appear On Power Bills
Knowing the costs of green energy would just be too confusing for customers
— gReader Pro…
Statistician trashes Obama cost estimates of climate: ‘Manipulated by regulators & bureaucrats’
Testifying before Congress, Ph.D. statistician Kevin Dayaratna trashes the Obama era Interagency Working Group (IWG) estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) — a metric to quantify economic damages associated with carbon dioxide emissions used to justify increased government regulations.
DR. DAYARATNA: “There are a variety of issues with these SCCs– the IAMs (Integrated Assessment Models) associated with these SCCs. The most fundamental issue is that they are extremely sensitive to very, very reasonable changes in assumptions. As I was referring to using the time horizon to 300 years, if you shift that to 150 years, which is still unrealistic, you get a drastically different estimate of the SCC. The discount rate– if you use a 7 percent discount rate, as mandated by the OMB(Office of Management and Budget), under the FUND model you will get a negative Social Cost of Carbon. And, the policy implication there would be that we shouldn’t be taxing carbon dioxide emissions but subsidizing it.”
Hearing: At what cost? Examining the Social Cost of Carbon
Subcommittee on Environment
US House Science Committee
February 28, 2017…
Naomi Klein admits that it’s not about carbon—it’s about capitalism.
Naomi Klein admits that it’s not about carbon—it’s about capitalism.
http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2017/02/naomi-klein-admits-that-its-not-about.html
Former Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Christiana Figueres gave the game away when she issued a press release admitting that their
aim is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
Naomi Klein in her latest book: This Changes Everything admits something very similar: (link)
Forget everything you think you know about global warming. The really inconvenient truth is that it’s not about carbon—it’s about capitalism. The convenient truth is that we can seize this existential crisis to transform our failed economic system and build something radically better.
AND it certainly isn’t about Carbon dioxide.
…
Point: Trump’s Too Smart to Fall for Harmful GOP Establishment Carbon Tax Plan
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.
Old-Guard Republicans to Push Carbon Tax at White House Meeting
and
-
Former White House advisers, cabinet secretaries pressing tax
-
Trump’s economic adviser Gary Cohn among scheduled attendees
A group of prominent Republicans and business leaders backing a tax on carbon dioxide were taking their case Wednesday to top White House aides, including chief economic adviser Gary Cohn.
The group, including former Treasury Secretaries Hank Paulson and James Baker, is pressing President Donald Trump to tax carbon dioxide in exchange for abolishing a slew of environmental regulations. They unveiled their plan with a press conference in Washington and an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.
“We know we have an uphill slog to get Republicans interested in this,” Baker said before heading to the White House. But “a conservative, free-market approach is a very Republican way of approaching the problem.”
Other possible attendees at the meeting include the president’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, who weighed climate change policy during the campaign, and Vice President Mike Pence.
The Republican and business leaders, calling themselves the Climate Leadership Council, lend their stature to an approach for addressing climate change that mirrors an idea already advanced by Exxon Mobil Corp. Supporters say the tax is a conservative solution to climate change that replaces a regulatory regime with a free-market approach for addressing the greenhouse gas emissions.
Wal-Mart Founder
Paulson, who served as Treasury secretary under President George W. Bush, previously has advocated a carbon tax through his eponymous think tank, the Paulson Institute. Baker, who served as secretary of state and Treasury secretary under two Republican administrations, as well as former Secretary of State George Shultz, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. founder Rob Walton and Sequoia Capital Operations LLC partner Thomas Stephenson, among others. Economic advisers to former presidents George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan also are involved in the effort.
“Climate change poses an unacceptable risk to our climate and to our economy,” Paulson said in a statement. “Putting a price on carbon is by far the most efficient and effective way to restrict emissions.”
Baker himself conceded he remains “somewhat of a skeptic about the extent to which man is responsible for climate change” but the
Actor DiCaprio says climate action is U.S.’s ‘biggest economic opportunity’
…NASA’s Lead ‘Global Warming’ scientist goes political: Calls for a carbon tax
By Paul Homewood
Gavin claims to be a climate scientist.
Yet as a supposedly objective scientist in charge of GISS, why is he making overtly political interventions.
In this interview with the Vancouver Sun last year, he stated:
We have to have a price on carbon because right now it’s still free to put carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. So if you put a price on carbon that is commensurate with the damage that carbon-dioxide emissions cause, then people will be smarter. They will say: ‘Well, I can spend that money and damage the planet or I can spend less money and buy an electric car that’s fed by hydro. Vancouver is trying to be a real leader in switching to carbon-neutral energy sources and moving away from oil for transportation. All those things are very positive and the B.C. carbon tax is one of the most progressive and far-reaching ideas — even though in practice it hasn’t made a huge difference yet.
It is surely the job of taxpayer funded scientists to stick to the science, and leave policy making to the politicians.
Not that his scientific credentials are up to much, if his next comment in the interview is anything to go by:
Q: What is the future for waterfront cities like Vancouver?
A: You are going to have to put up with rising sea levels; they are not going to go down. But there’s a huge difference between a foot or two over 100 years and a metre or two metres. There’s a lot of waterfront development going on but is it sea-level-rise smart? I don’t know that it is. So don’t put stuff in the basement, have all your electrical equipment on the second floor or on the roof.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, sea levels at Vancouver have been rising at a rate of just 0.37mm/yr since 1910:
https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_station.htm?stnid=822-071
At this rate, Gavin’s two meters of sea level rise will take 5405 years.
#
Related Link:
Gavin Schmidt’s climate change foibles:
Study: Obama ‘war on coal’ responsible for 84% of decline in coal use – Fracking only 16% responsible
…
Watch: ‘Collateral Damage’ – ‘Forgotten Casualties of the Left’s War on Coal’ – See Human Devastation of Anti-Coal Policies
ABOUT THIS PROJECT
Several months ago, MRCTV sent a camera crew to the southern counties of West Virginia to document the impact of EPA regulations on communities that have historically relied on the coal industry for their livelihood. What the team found was devastating.
The effect of shuttered coal mines and the loss of thousands of coal jobs have trickled down into nearly every facet of these communities, crippling local businesses, destroying housing markets, and forcing desperate families from their homes. Thousands are without work, while still thousands more live under the constant threat of job loss and economic ruin. Local charities struggle to meet the needs of their communities. While the media are focusing on macro issues like “climate change,” hardworking Americans are left to wonder how they will keep food on the table and lights on in houses they’re struggling to hold on to.
Through up-close footage and a compelling series of brutally honest interviews, “Collateral Damage” exposes in stark detail the real, human impact of President Obama’s promised and delivered assault on the coal industry, and on the hardworking American families of Appalachia.
This is a real story about real people. Please help us tell their story by sharing this video.…
‘Climate change’ may spark next financial crisis, fmr. Bank of England regulator says as he pushes carbon tax
“It is potentially a systemic risk.”
Climate change could cause the next financial crisis, the former deputy head of the Bank of England’s regulatory department said Monday.
Climate change “is potentially a systemic risk,” Paul Fisher, who recently retired as deputy head of the Prudential Regulation Authority, told Bloomberg. “It could be the trigger for the next financial crisis,” he said, noting that climate change can force a sudden change in prices in a similar way that the United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union damaged the sterling’s value.
Fisher, an expert on monetary policy and financial markets, explained the effects of climate change — storms, drought, and other environmental instability — can move financial markets as there is a risk of “system-wide repricing of assets happening quite suddenly.” He also said that policy changes, such as implementing a carbon tax, could have a market effect.
Some elected officials argue that environmental policies to reduce the emissions that cause climate change are too costly, and Fisher’s comments come in line with years of economic research that underscore the importance of predictable regulatory regime over market instability. Not acting on climate change could be much worse, economically.…