THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume X, Issue # 267, October 14, 2008
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THE U.S.A., EUROPE, & CLIMATE CHANGE
By Paul K. Driessen
FOLLOWING EUROPE'S LEAD ON CLIMATE CHANGE: WHICH LEAD SHOULD WE FOLLOW? EVEN IF IT TAKES
US OFF AN ECONOMIC CLIFF? TO WHAT END?
FULL STORY:
Environmentalists, journalists, and politicians say tough climate legislation is a moral imperative. Global warming science
is settled, the United States is out of step with other nations, America must follow Europe’s lead to prevent climate chaos.
It’s great rhetoric. But which European lead should we follow? And how is it morally responsible to enact climate
legislation that kills jobs and punishes families and businesses, to reduce global temperatures by perhaps 0.2 degrees?
There is no “consensus” on the “problem” or “solution.” Over 31,000 scientists, including hundreds of climate scientists,
vigorously disagree with the assertion that carbon dioxide emissions produced by human activity will cause a climate
cataclysm.
Long ago ice ages and interglacial periods, the Sahara’s shift from verdant valleys to parched desert, and protracted
droughts in the Yucatan and American Southwest had nothing to do with humans, they note. Sunspot counts are now at a
50-year low, indicating reduced solar activity and possibly explaining why planetary temperatures haven’t risen in a decade,
despite soaring CO2 levels, say solar experts. Some computer models predict major climatic shifts, but they don’t include
solar and other natural factors.
Hydrocarbons provide 85% of all U.S. energy. They are the foundation of an economy that has been shaken to its core and
may be entering a recession. Wind and solar represent less than 0.5%, and provide only intermittent auxiliary power. The
new “Lights out in 2009?” study warns that the United States “faces potentially crippling brownouts and blackouts,”
beginning in 2009, especially in regions that experience prolonged hot spells during Summer months, due to insufficient
generating capacity.
A bank that wanted to install solar panels found it would cost $850,000, but would cut only 12% off its electricity bill. That
meant it would take 90 years to pay off panels which would last only 30 years. Fiscal and technological realities must remain
the foundation of “social responsibility.”
Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives are, nevertheless, promoting new cap-and-trade legislation that could be
even more punitive than Warner-Lieberman, which even sponsors admitted would cost nearly $7 trillion. They oppose oil
and gas drilling, as well as new coal, nuclear, and hydroelectric plants. Many want to “transform” our energy and economic
system – from one that works to one based on heavily subsidized technologies that aren’t ready for prime time, and may not
exist for decades.
We have to do our part, they insist, and join other nations in “saving the planet.” But which “responsible” leaders should we
follow?
Countries that signed the Kyoto Protocol and agreed to slash greenhouse
gas emissions to 7% below 1990 levels? Or those whose actual emissions
are well above their Kyoto targets: e.g., Portugal 12% above, Italy 17%
above, Spain 22% above, Denmark 25% above, Canada 27% above?
A European Union that solved this predicament by agreeing to slash
emissions 20% by 2020 – and, presumably, 30% by 2030 (or 40 by 40) when
this new promise also proves too difficult or painful?
Angela Merkel as the German Chancellor of 2006, who promised to eliminate
coal and nuclear power in Germany – or Merkel as the Chancellor of today,
who wants to build new coal-fired power plants and shield chemical, steel,
manufacturing, cement and automotive industries, by reducing emission
goals or providing free cap-and-trade permits.
Poland and other former Eastern Bloc nations, which intend to block a new
EU climate change agreement, because they depend on coal for up to 90%
of their electricity and on Russia for up to 97% of their natural gas, were
held back for 50 years under Communist dictators, and now are loathe to be
kept from developing by dictates from Brussels?
France, Germany and Austria, which want EU climate restrictions eased to
help industries struggling with high energy prices, the economic crisis, and
competition form less regulated overseas competitors that rely on coal for
power generation – which could force companies to move operations
overseas, unless they receive preferential treatment under onerous emission
rules?
Britain, where politicians are being pummeled because climate taxes and
skyrocketing energy prices have forced 5.5 million households to live in “fuel
poverty,” and factories are saying they may have to close their doors for the
Winter, because of soaring fuel prices?
The Australia of 2007, which supported taking action on climate change by a
55% margin? Or the Down Under of 2008, which opposed such action by 55%
before the global financial meltdown?
China and India, which put reducing rampant poverty, with its high human
and environmental costs, ahead of the speculative effects of future climate
change, and say they will be better able to adapt to climate changes (natural
or human) if they are rich and technologically advanced?
Countries that want to help impoverished nations develop abundant, reliable,
affordable energy to reduce lung and intestinal disease and death, by powering
prosperity, safe water, refrigeration and modern hospitals? Or those that tell
African and other destitute countries they must be satisfied with pitiful amounts
of intermittent energy from “sustainable” sources like wind and solar?
Al Gore, the prophet of ecological doom? Or Al Gore who flies only private jets,
owns a fancy houseboat, and uses more electricity in a week than 28 million
Ugandans together use in a year?
Bureaucrats, scientists, and politicians who seek open, robust, honest debate on
climate change? Or those who use global warming hysteria to secure research
grants, control every aspect of our energy and economic lives, and attend
conferences at four-star resorts in Bali?
Or perhaps three Italian Ministers, who called the EU climate action plan
“politically correct garbage” that “would kill any economic improvement” and
“achieve very modest environmental benefits,” in a period of international
economic difficulties that call for prudent decision-making?
California gets much of its electricity from coal-fired power plants located 600 miles from Los Angeles, enabling it to claim
it’s “a leader” in curbing carbon dioxide. (It also gets substantial electricity from a nuclear power plant in Arizona, and
most of its oil from Alaska.) Utah, on the other hand, generates most of its electricity from coal-fired plants within the state.
How many states can outsource their power and pollution? Which ones have more affordable electricity and gasoline,
enabling poor families to live better on lower incomes, and still have money left for rent, college, retirement, healthcare, and
charity? Which states are the more socially responsible leaders?
Morality, environmental justice, and corporate social responsibility are too often defined by narrowly-focused
environmentalist ideologies. They are too often winner-takes-all contests, pitting rich countries and eco-elites against poor
families and nations that must worry more about immediate life-or-death concerns than speculative human-caused climate
chaos. They too often replace rough-and-tumble debate over science and economics with intimidation and dogmatism.
We need to protect our economies, jobs, and planet. We need conservation and all forms of energy: whatever works best,
at lowest cost, for particular cities, states, regions, and nations.
Will we follow politicians and activists who offer fear-mongering and utopian promises, as they lead us lemming-like off an
economic cliff? Or will we follow leaders who offer honest, unflinching analysis and sound judgment, and stop us short of
the precipice?
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Europe, European States, Politics, & Public Policy
Political Environmentalism Versus Human Progress & Prosperity:
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
The Earth's Natural History, Global Climate Changes,
& the Future of Human Life & Civilization on the Planet:
Science, Ideology, & Public Policy
Political Economy -- Philosophies, Systems, & Public Policies:
Government, the Economy, & Economic Prosperity
Paul K. Driessen is Senior Policy Advisor for the Congress of Racial Equality, the Committee for A Constructive Tomorrow, and the
Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise. Driessen is author of Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death, which can be
obtained at www.Eco-Imperialism.com.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume X, 2008
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity