Skip to comments.Carbon control isn't real goal
Posted on 02/25/2011 3:16:32 AM PST by Scanian
The Environmental Protection Agency is about to impose regulations and taxes on carbon emissions by execu tive fiat in the name of stopping global climate change. Yet the United States has already dramatically cut its emissions and probably has already complied with the Kyoto/Copenhagen goals for reduced emissions.
And we've done it without taxes, regulations or government intervention.
In 2007, the US emitted 6.12 billion metric tons of carbon. In 2008, the total fell to 5.92 billion tons.
In 2009, while President Obama was promising that the country would cut its emissions to 5 billion tons by 2015, the US economy and public -- on their own -- cut to 5.5 billion. Most likely, by the time the 2010 measurements are in, we'll have reached the Obama goal.
Many attribute this to the Great Recession -- a slower economy uses less power and pollutes less. But US emissions started dropping before the recession and have continued to fall.
A big part of the reason is that we're using less coal in generating electricity.
As we explain in our new book, "Revolt!" (due out next week), coal accounted for 52 percent of electric generation in 1996 but accounts for only 45 percent today. And coal's share is down 4 percent in just the last 12 months.
Natural gas has almost doubled its share, from 13 percent in 1996 to 23 percent in 2009, while renewables (solar, geothermal, etc.) have risen from 2 percent to 4 percent.
The free-enterprise system has responded to persuasion and incentives without the heavy hand of taxation, government regulation and coercion.
These data expose the basic truth: Neither the cap-and-trade bill nor EPA carbon regulation is needed to lower US emissions. The bureaucratic/environmentalist alliance wants these measures to increase public control over our economy...
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
No... Our energy consumption has dropped because the economy tanked. It’s hard to gas up the SUV when it’s been repossessed.
Every single thing this government does is intended to do that.
Increase public control my arsenic, Obama wants to destroy our economy ...
10% unemployment is probably good for reducing those carbon emissions!
Everything the Left does is predicated on the idea that fewer humans would be better. That's why they hate the family. Why they love abortion, and homosexuals. If they can get us living in caves, shivering, eating nuts and berries, then a global human population of 100 million would be achievable. And they would need to be the tribal chieftains, of course.
I believe the push to pretend carbon needs to be conrolled and to continue the trading is to get the derivatives market going in carbon - which is accounted for in the cap and trade bill.
If we liked what derivatives did to the housing market, can’t wait to see what they do to air!
Agreed. That is my inescapable conclusion, too. But hey, what’s a connie movement for if not to create a totalitarian state?
And the People!
Ok. I just want to say that my assumption (and your chart) are irrelevant anyway because I don’t see CO2 as a pollutant.
Plant food is good.
Good info, thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.