Unilateral carbon restrictions will hurt the U.S. economy

In April of this year, I posted an article here titled, “What if the climate change zealots are wrong?” where I proposed that a unilateral carbon cap-and-trade policy by the government would:

1. Unilaterally hurt every American citizen by what would be tantamount to taxing our use of carbon beyond the taxes we already pay, like gas tax, for example.
2. Unilaterally hurt U.S. businesses by making them less competitive with other nations, especially China and India, which have not interest in carbon reduction.
3. Actually harm the global environment because industrial production would move from the U.S. to China and India, where carbon efficiency is much poorer than in the U.S.

Since that post, a few things have happened:

1. The American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454), a/k/a Cap and Trade and the Waxman-Markey bill, passed the House and there is a companion bill in the Senate.
2. When the G8 global leaders met recently in Italy, they did not agree on any near-term carbon reductions, only a goal set 40 years hence. What does that say about a multi-lateral commitment to carbon reduction?
3. In a Senate committee hearing recently, during questioning by Oklahoma’s Sen. James Inhofe (R), EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson confirmed that unilateral carbon reduction by the U.S. would have no effect on the global climate.

As I wrote in April, carbon reduction protocols without China and India participating are useless environmentally and a competitive disadvantage for the U.S. According to Sen. Inhofe, “With China and India recently issuing statements of defiant opposition to mandatory emissions controls, acting alone through the job-killing Waxman-Markey bill would impose severe economic burdens on American consumers, businesses and families, all without any impact on climate.”

Well said, Senator. Perhaps he reads my blog.

One thing you won’t see in the mainstream media is reporting on the U.S. carbon footprint per dollar of GDP, which has been decreasing significantly for the past 20 years. Proof of this is the fact that oil price spikes in recent years have had less of an impact on the economy as in decades past.

Remember, my argument isn’t whether the earth is warming or who is causing it, but rather that the United States should address this issue without doing unilateral harm to ourselves. We have the ability to lead the world in alternative fuels for the next century if we encourage innovation instead of unilaterally punishing consumption.

Here is a link to the previous post. I look forward to your comments.

Click here for previous post “What if the climate change zealots are wrong.”

One Response to “Unilateral carbon restrictions will hurt the U.S. economy”

  1. 1
    Alprazolam Says:

    Moreover, without concerted commitments by the major economies, including those in the developing world, Congress would be foolish to impose unilateral restrictions on the U.S. economy and the past four years have demonstrated conclusively that there is no international consensus for action.

Leave a Reply




Warning: fsockopen() [function.fsockopen]: php_network_getaddresses: getaddrinfo failed: Temporary failure in name resolution in /var/www/wordpress/wp-includes/class-snoopy.php on line 1142

Warning: fsockopen() [function.fsockopen]: unable to connect to twitter.com:80 (Unknown error) in /var/www/wordpress/wp-includes/class-snoopy.php on line 1142