Guest post by Steven Goddard
The Senate Budget Committee chairman said today :
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said he has spoken to enough colleagues about several different provisions in the budget to make him think Congress won’t pass it. Conrad urged White House budget director Peter Orszag not to “draw lines in the sand” with lawmakers, most notably on Obama’s plan for a cap-and-trade system to curb carbon emissions. “Anybody who thinks it will be easy to get the votes on the budget in the conditions that we face is smoking something,”
So who is Senator Conrad referring to with that last comment?
Orszag acknowledged concerns over the budget and added that the budget plan represents the administration’s “best judgments.“
I wonder if the people in Michigan fighting to keep ice from destroying their houses, are willing to pay extra taxes to fight global warming?
“Despite the Obama administration’s claim that its budget wouldn’t raise taxes on families earning less than $250,000 a year, ‘the budget before us assumes large amounts of money’ from the climate-change legislation, Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, the top Republican on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said at a hearing Tuesday. ‘And that means higher prices for Americans for food, for gas, for electricity, and in a state like Michigan for home heating – pretty much anything that they buy.'”
“So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”
– Candidate Obama in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle January 17, 2008
I wonder if any of that huge sum might get passed on to people making less than $250,000? What do readers think?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Bil (04:27:42) :
http://calorieoffsetting.com/
Genius! Why didn’t I think of that! Awesome stuff.
[snip – this is way OT, let us stick to climate and carbon cap and trade please – Anthony]
Anna:
The US endured the eight years of Bush, and the rest of the world with it, with its war mongering, its adoption of torture as a means to ends, its subversion of constitutional rights, etc. etc. People waited for the election.
Anna, i read your science with great respect, but everything you impute to the all-Evil George Bush is either blown far out of proportion or false. Seriously, you’ve got a pretty bad case of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Strictly for your own good, try comparing anti-Bush propaganda to AGW alarmism.
Or as a psychodynamic tactic, you could also try just forgetting about Bush! He’s gone!
Love the cartoon! But…how do I as a tech challenged guy go about setting up my carbon offset business? And I see another offset opportunity growing out of this. If I lay around in bed, I may need to purchase ‘fat offsets’ as I gain weight. This stuff is brilliant! Look at all of the new “green industries” growing out of one humble mans (algore) courageous quest…
BTW, DW, Alex and Anna V, all of the attacks on Pres. Bush and Gov. Palin have been personal hate filled demonizations (also implied in your own attacks) while comments I’ve read on this site attack Obama’s cartoonish appointments and policies. Pres. Bush resisted the AGW lunacy while Obama supports and promotes it. That’s the difference. Now, don’t be so thin skinned when someone on this site is critical of “the One”.
“At least the war on the economy is going well…”
[snip – this is way OT, let us stick to climate and carbon cap and trade please. In your case you get a time-out. I don’t want the sort of angry things you’ve been posting. Do NOT do it again or you’ll find yourself banned. Final warning.- Anthony]
HasItBeen4YearsYet? (08:34:13) :
“REPLY: Assuming you trust the magnitude of the HadCRUT record, the graph is true. But as we’ve seen, the anomaly may be lower due to weather station siting and urbanization issues. – Anthony”
Right, but doesn’t it at least set an upper limit that shows the models to be way off? or is it sufficiently unreliable that we can’t count on it either way?
[snip – this is way OT, let us stick to climate and carbon cap and trade please – Anthony]
I believed that Obama Administration would draw their philosophy from Karl Marx; but, I now realize that I had the wrong Marx, they are students of Groucho.
Michael Ronayne
Nutley, NJ
Ron de Haan you are my brother! I agree with everything that you said. We owe it to the rest of the World population to inform them of the fraud that AGW is. Otherwise we will have the suffering and probably deaths of millions on our hands because we knowingly did nothing.
Fascinating as usual but find the blanket acceptence of Obama being a step up from his predeccessor as bizarre given his daily loony left policy statements. This is a man who believes (man induced as thr majority factor) Global warming /Climate Change is a dead cert and puts zealots into powerful positions and yet several general murmerings of approval. This is as far beyond my comprehension as those who so avidly believe in a warming that isn’t happening. I know the warming disappearing doesn;t prove anything neccessarily but it does if your belief system is built on predictions from computer models that are totally wrong. Back to the drawing board as a minimum.
I just found this
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/3930/hadcrut3scattervj2.png
It’s the first I’ve heard of it, and it appears to blow the models right out of the water.
That is the standard HadCRUT observation that doesn’t take into account urbanisation, smog and land use changes.
If we were to simulate what the 19th to mid 20th century’s temperature records would have looked like without the dense urban smog that existed at the time, and then also make adjustments for the growing urban heat island effect, we would be left with something like this:
http://img10.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hadcrut3scattervj2.jpg
The blue line represents the new temperature reconstruction and sensitivity to atmospheric CO2. Instead of the 0.6-0.8C warming of the last century and a half, we get half of that or about 0.35C. Total temperature with a doubling of CO2 would be about a degree, if unpredictable positive or negative feedbacks don’t occur.
I did not think that this was a political blog; yet this thread is very political. So to continue in the violating the blog’s purpose, here are a couple of thoguhts. Disgust with Bush is very understandable, especially if one limits his/her analysis to surface examination. Yet, Bush is basically the only one who made any efforts to stop the momentum to the current financial crisis. He tried to reign in the excesses of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he objected to the abusive use of the Community Reinvestment Act. If you are not aware of how these moves were stymied, I suggest keeping up with current events and going beyond MSM surface reporting. Meanwhile, the Dow Jones Ind Avg is a forward looking metric of investor anticipation of future cash flows. Since Obama took a commanding lead in the polls, the Dow Jones Ind Ave has fallen from 11500 to 6600. (The return to full double taxation of corporate income alone could account for a 10 to 20% fall in the index.) Yet the real relevance to this blog is Obama’s cap-and-trade policy which really is a tax on all Americans — a point that seems to escape the mental capability of MSM. This tax will further reduce future cash flows (as well as employment) and likely is another reason why the index has fallen so much. Of course, as the index falls, wealth is destroyed which reduces spending which spurs more unemployment — such a vicious cycle!
As for discussion of warmongering and constitutional abuses, those subjects are very much off topic, and I will not further those subjects.
REPLY: I agree. I’ve been away from moderating a bit, and those issues have been removed with an admonition to commenters added. Sometimes the comments get a bit out of hand, as they do at any blog. In this case I’ve taken steps to put it back on track. – Anthony
IMPORTANT NOTE:
I will close this thread if the comments continue to stray towards anything other than cap and trade or directly related issues.
– Anthony
[snip – this is way OT, let us stick to climate and carbon cap and trade please – Anthony]
I’ve noticed lately, and especially in this thread, that there are too many attacks against other posters, mainly based on party affiliations. Hating G.W. is not a reason to love Obama; conversely, thinking that Obama’s policies are socialist, or thinking Gore is a self-serving liar, is not a reason to say that Bush’s policies were good. But, these attacks are beside the point.
Please people, let’s keep this blog about science and truth. Anthony, failing self-policing of comments by posters, I would suggest that you may want to use your scissors a little more aggresively until this nastiness lets up.
Reply: Yes, please. No more personal politics. Stick to science commentary, or comments on general carbon cap and trade tax policy. ~dbstealey, mod.
UK Sceptic (23:48:48) :
“Let’s have a methane tax too. Methane is a greenhouse gas and all that flatulence, human as well as bovine, must be wreaking havock.”
Correct. Which is why there is a proposed methane tax on legumes (commonly – beans.) The Legume Flat (ulence) Tax will be based on the estimated methane conversion rate of common black, red and garbonzo beans in the human gastrointestinal system. “This second, most deadly of human GHG emissions must be regulated as the flatulence of six billion people is speeding the melting of ice caps.” Winifred Bumford, Flat-Tax Now coalition.
As many of us have learned both here and in other interactive internet activities, never assume the people you’re talking with share your politics. Ever. If politics are something important to your discussion group, then make sure you get it all out before the fights start.
Personally, I am offended by any grotesque display of anti-President, no matter who it is. Neither the current nor his predecessor nor even his were “evil” or any of the other ridiculous names being thrown around. (Although I might cut some slack at Carter bashing).
Either McCain or 0bama would have had to deal with this, and no matter how you cut it it is going to be ugly. I’ve told people for years that cutting CO2 emissions is NOT something that affects others, IT AFFECTS YOU. It’s YOU that will not be able to heat your home or drive your car every time you want to, it’s YOU that will not be able to buy certain products because their carbon cost is too high, and it’s YOU that will be wondering why you got a huge raise last year but are making so much less.
Yes, I wish the world was the beautiful Utopia of lollipops and rainbows that certain people want it to be, where our wonderful next generation technology doesn’t pollute and animals all live in harmony near the rainforest. But we’re not there, and “CAP AND TRADE” is a buzzword that means FINANCIAL HARDSHIP and SKIMMING by the privileged few. Ask those currently going through this crap. It’s not pretty and never will be.
Anthony: Please accept my apologies. cdl
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5io0CdRQb86KOIapmxnNKJ7YQLoLw
US Senator: Recession wrong time for cap-and-trade
1 hour ago
WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States should not impose a cap-and-trade system to battle climate change this year because it amounts to a painful tax during a deep recession, a Republican lawmaker said Wednesday.
“Now is not the time to put a national sales tax on every electric bill and every gasoline purchase,” Republican Senator Lamar Alexander, who sits on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, told reporters.
“I’m open, as are several Republicans, to cap and trade, but it’s getting increasingly difficult to think about it in the middle of a recession,” said Alexander, who hails from Tennessee.
SO we have the FTC the FCC the FAA the DEA the IRS the INS…..what’s next on the horizon???
The F. C. T.? (The FEDERAL CAP and TRADE Commission).
LOL….don’t laugh…it probably already exists.
More bureaucracy to put more bureaucrats to work in the failing economy that they helped cause.
And you don’t see Walmart or predatory corporations like them aggressively trying to reduce its “carbon footprint” because it costs them extra $$$ and because their lobbyists will ASSURE them the ability to continue raping small towns across the world.
The real FALLOUT from the Cap and Trade policies is going to ultimately adversely affect you and me… Joe and Jane Average Citizen.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/carbon_cap_and_trade_for_fido.html
March 11, 2009
Carbon Cap and Trade for Fido?
Richard Henry Lee
There is a serious shortcoming in Obama’s global warming initiative since pets are excluded as a significant source of greenhouse gasses. In the EPA’s recently released CO2 initiative, there is no mention of dogs, cats or other pets as CO2 polluters. There are the usual culprits such as cement makers, refineries and chemical manufacturers, but dogs and cats are nowhere to be found.
This is a serious omission since our pets contribute significantly to global warming. There are estimates that there are 90 million cats and 73 million dogs in the US and the pet food they eat is loaded with meat, poultry, fish and grain which all require heavy emissions of CO2 to put the food in their dish. Then there are the petroleum based plastic dishes and other pet paraphernalia such as mutt mitts which all contribute. And don’t forget the trips to the veterinarian where we need to include the carbon footprints of the office and professional staff along with the expensive, polluting SUV’s those veterinarians drive.
There is an estimate that each dog’s carbon paw print is 1.75 metric tons of CO2 annually and cats about half a metric ton. By doing the math, this means that dogs contribute about 128 million metric tons of CO2 and cats another 45 million for a total of 173 million metric tons. This is slightly more than half the 314 million metric tons CO2 that our personal vehicles release annually.
To remedy this oversight, we need a grass roots effort to start a cap and trade program for pets. To start, there should be a federal tax on pets based upon their carbon paw prints. In addition, pets who received large inheritances, like the $12 million that Leona Helmsley’s dog received, should pay a much higher tax so that the government could redistribute the wealth to less fortunate pets.
Finally, the taxes received should be used to fund research into developing sustainable pets to replace our heavily polluting dogs and cats. Perhaps a solar powered robotic pet might be the answer.
Re the cost to consumers:
Cap and trade indicates a carbon-emitter will either purchase offsets, or invest capital to reduce his carbon emissions. That is known as Carbon Capture and Sequestration, or CO2 capture.
From the Dept of Energy: “CO2 is currently recovered from [power plant] combustion exhaust by using amine absorbers and cryogenic coolers. The cost of CO2 capture using current technology, however, is on the order of $150 per ton of carbon – much too high for carbon emissions reduction applications. Analysis performed by SFA Pacific, Inc. indicates that adding existing technologies for CO2 capture to an electricity generation process could increase the cost of electricity by 2.5 cents to 4 cents/kWh depending on the type of process.” [bold emphasis added]
Therefore, coal-fired power plants will not be shut down, but their customers will pay a bit more for electricity. Per the EIA, U.S. residential customers paid an average (nationwide) price of 11.35 cents per kwh in 2008. Prices would increase around 35 percent (4 divided by 11.35)
There is an issue of where to sequester the captured CO2; converting the CO2 into solid NaHCO3 is one possibility. The starting material, NaOH, is produced from electrolysis of salt water using wind-generated electricity.
The overall benefit is power supply remains reliable, (coal-fired plants still running), wind-power is used as required and available to sequester the CO2, jobs are created through making and maintaining wind-turbines.
The economic burden on consumers is large, especially those on fixed incomes or very low income. Replacing coal-fired plants by building a bunch of nuclear power plants would increase power costs much more.
Ok, fire away. This is sure to bring many critical comments!
J. Peden (09:07:55) :
This is not a political blog, nor a political thread. My view of the politics during the Bush years was formed from the european left to center press, and the snipped view I posted is a view a lot of the outside the US world holds. No anti anti Bush propaganda was necessary, it was being much closer to the Iraq war than the average Joe in the US.
The reason I was responding strongly was to what a poster said:
Ron de Haan (23:43:33) :
It is also in our interest to see which threat Obama represents and get him out of office as soon as possible..
pointing out that changes of politicians happen with elections and changes of laws by influencing legislators. So if the cap and trade is a bad law, the legislators should be enlightened asap.
Surely the sad truth of all this is that the US and UK Governments are desperate for more money. Extracting money via ‘green’ taxes is more politcally acceptable- at least in theory-than other more direct taxes, as it appears that it is industry paying. However the consumer always ends up picking up the bill in the long run.
In the UK we have around £1000 a year per family in green taxes-electric, petrol, air travel etc. Some have been delayed due to the down turn but around the same again is on the way. [snip] I think it is clear that much of the funding will come from ‘green’ taxes of one sort or another and Obama will likely have 8 clear years-two terms-to carry out the democratic will of the people.
Tonyb
[snip off-topic, please stick to cap and trade, not who would be the better president- Anthony]