US leads the world in CO2 reduction. Further, there is no such thing as "America's carbon tax."
We have no 'carbon tax.'
12/1/12, "America's carbon tax offers a lesson to the rest of the planet on fighting climate change," UK Guardian, Henry Porter
"But the lobbyists don't have much time, if this is to be part of the budget deal, and it is now well understood that $500bn in budget cuts represents about a million American jobs....
The vital point is that a price on carbon in the US will have a dramatic geopolitical impact, as Dieter Helm and John Llewellyn independently point out. Europe is in a muddle of cap and trading, with each country doing its own thing"...
[Ed. note: "Each country" in Europe is by no means
"doing its own thing." Most are subject to EU climate rules, invest in EU cap and trade markets, and finance EU climate endeavors. Per UBS Bank at least $287 billion has been wasted via EU cap and trade with no improvement in CO2. This doesn't even get into the fact that the system is infested with organized crime].
(continuing): "but it is at least actively trying to reduce emissions.* With a settled carbon price in the US, countries with half the world's GDP will be working in a more or less consistent direction.
America will look amazingly good compared to the shambolic arrangements in Europe and downright saintly compared to China.
Yet we have to understand that none of this may be enough and that our attitudes to energy saving, social equity, personal consumption and endless growth may have to change to prevent global temperatures rising by that supremely destructive 4C."
---------------------------------------
For the UK Guardian's information, US government intervention in climate matters was mandated 22 years ago:
Global Warming ‘action’ was institutionalized in US government in 1990 by George Bush the 1st via the “U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990.” CO2 is mentioned near the end. Also that year the U.S. began emissions trading "to control environmental problems." (p. 2)
Devoting 13 federal agencies to ‘climate' is probably too much 'climate action.'
Billions have been taken from US taxpayers for 'climate' via agency budget allocations, tax subsidies, diversion of US military to climate or green projects, countless federal regulations, vast sums shipped out in foreign aid for no-strings ‘climate’ endeavors.
Just last month, Obama took 'climate action' by giving $6 billion US taxpayer dollars to the Sultan of Brunei
who owns 5000+ cars and to the Pres. of Indonesia, a country so corrupt even the World Bank says crime adds 20% to costs. Below, one of the Sultan's cars:
7/24/12, "The Sultan's Cars," wheel to wheel blog.
This may be an example of "social equity" the UK Guardian says Americans must learn. (end of article)
-----------------------------------------
6/4/12, “Climate change stunner: USA leads world in CO2 cuts since 2006,” Vancouver Observer, Saxifrage
“Not only that, but as my top chart shows, US CO2 emissions are falling even faster than what President Obama pledged in the global Copenhagen Accord.”…
=============================
1/23/11, "Europe's $287 billion carbon 'waste': UBS report," The Australian, by Sid Maher
"SWISS banking giant UBS says the European Union's emissions trading scheme has cost the continent's consumers $287 billion for "almost zero impact" on cutting carbon emissions."...EU CO2 trading provided "windfall profits" to participants paid for by "electricity customers.""
=============================
Organized crime happy with Europe CO2 trading:
2/1/2011, "Austria Asks Sweden to Return Carbon Permits Worth $3.9 Million," Bloomberg, by Johan Carlstrom and Mathew Carr
"Organized crime may be responsible for theft of European Union emission allowances this month, and national authorities are working with Europol...a top EU climate official said." Sweden admits it has Austria's stolen 'carbon credits' but says it might just be 'a coincidence.'"
=============================
Further refutation of UK Guardian claim that individual European countries "do their own thing" on climate:
6/7/12, "Europe's factories braced for power price squeeze," Euractiv
"EU member states are expected to close a deal on the bloc's proposed energy efficiency directive by the end of June amid worries over the consequences it could have over the price of electricity in Europe's factories.
Factory owners are unnerved by EU's the upcoming energy efficiency directive, which is set to be agreed at the end of the month."...
===============================
6/14/11, "Europe tackles huge fraud
," Nature, "Regulators scramble to recover millions of euros awarded to fake research projects."
"They are prosecuting members of a
large network accused of pocketing more than €50 million (US$72
million) in EC (European Commission) grants for fake research projects....In Brussels, meanwhile, the EC has terminated four collaborative
projects in information technology, and excluded more than
30 grant-winners from participation in around 20 ongoing projects.
Investigations are still under way in the United Kingdom, France,
Greece, Austria, Sweden, Slovenia and Poland."...
=============================
4/21/12, "Why [CO2] Emissions Are Declining in the U.S. But Not in Europe," by Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus, newgeography.com
"As we note below in a new article for Yale360, a funny thing happened: U.S. emissions started going down in 2005 and are expected to decline further over the next decade."
=============================
""We do worry a lot that there is not much coordination between those working on the taxation, the regulation and the pricing of carbon," said IETA's Derwent."...
5/30/11, "Exclusive: EU energy plan threatens carbon billions," Reuters, Pete Harrison
"The Europe Union's carbon market could be flooded with excess pollution permits over the next decade, cutting prices in half and depriving governments of billions in budgeted revenues, EU sources say.
"There's a real concern of negative impacts on prices if the issue is not properly addressed," one EU source said on condition of anonymity. "Some of the studies imply that carbon prices will collapse."
It is not clear, however, whether European governments will support measures that would erode carbon prices, which would put a severe dent in budgeted government revenues in 2013-2020."...
=============================
8/16/12, “AP IMPACT: CO2 emissions in US drop to 20-year low,” AP, Kevin Begos
“In a surprising turnaround, the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere in the U.S. has fallen dramatically to its lowest level in 20 years, and government officials say the biggest reason is that cheap and plentiful natural gas has led many power plant operators to switch from dirtier-burning coal.
Many of the world’s leading climate scientists didn’t see the drop coming, in large part because it happened as a result of market forces rather than direct government action against carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere.
Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University, said the shift away from coal is reason for “cautious optimism” about potential ways to deal with climate change….
In a little-noticed technical report, the U.S. Energy Information Agency, a part of the Energy Department, said this month that energy related U.S. CO2 emissions for the first four months of this year fell to about 1992 levels. Energy emissions make up about 98 percent of the total. The Associated Press contacted environmental experts, scientists and utility companies and learned that virtually everyone believes the shift could have major long-term implications for U.S. energy policy.”…
--------------------------------------------------------
1/15/11, “Recession Special: Cleaner Air,“ NY Times, Matthew Wald
“What the government has not mandated, the economy is doing on its own: emissions of global warming gases in the United States are down.
According to the Energy Department, carbon dioxide emissions peaked in this country in 2005 and will not reach that level again until the early 2020s.”…
=================================
6/22/12, “U.S. cuts greenhouse gases despite do-nothing Congress,” CNN, Steve Hargreaves
“Even factoring in a stronger economy, forecasters see greenhouse gas emissions continuing to fall….Others take the U.S. success in reducing its energy sector emissions as a sign that its fragmented, state-based, regulatory approach has worked better than Europe’s market-based cap-and-trade approach.”
=================================
NRDC notes US CO2 drop and the fact that there has been minimal press coverage of it:
6/26/12, “The Incredible Shrinking Carbon Pollution Forecast – Part 2,” switchboard.nrdc.org, Dan Lashof
“While there has been some press coverage of these facts (see here and here) I continue to find that most people are surprised to learn about this progress.”…
————————————————
If temperatures go up for a day, a month or 6 months, US human-caused CO2 is not, can’t possibly be the reason:
6/29/12, “US Carbon Output Forecasts Shrink Again,” American Interest, Walter Russell Mead
=============================
Some examples of climate cash sought in 2011:
1/11/11, "Big Money in Climate Change: Who Gives, Who Gets," Al Fin
----------------------------------------------------
3/26/12, "Obama Requests $770 Million to Fight Global Warming Overseas," CNS News, Matt Cover
"The Obama administration has requested $770 million in federal funds to combat the effects of global warming in developing countries, a new congressional report details, continuing its policy of using foreign aid to combat the effects of global warming in the developing world.
The figure, from a recent report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), shows that despite another year of $1 trillion deficits, the Obama administration continues to pursue its policy of using foreign aid funds for anti-global warming measures – known as the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI).
According to CRS, the government has spent a total of $2.5 billion on GCCI since 2010 on overseas anti-global warming efforts in Latin America, Asia, and Africa."...
=========================
UN environmental consultant says fraud in UN carbon trading can't be fixed, is interwoven in too many public and private sector jobs including the World Bank and the UN. And, "there is
- nobody in that world that is critical of the process because they are all making their living off it.”"...
----------------------------------------------
12/1/10, "EU Carbon permits missing from registry due to (computer) virus," Reuters, Nina Chestney
"One million European carbon permits (valued at $19.54 million US) have gone missing from the Romanian subsidiary of cement company Holcim's (HOLN.VX) emissions registry account due to a computer virus,
- the EU Commission said on Wednesday."...
2/21/11, "Green economy needs 2% of every nation's income, says UN," UK Guardian, Fiona Harvey
==============================
7/16/10, "Carbon Trading Used as Money-Laundering Front," Jakarta Globe
===========================
10/8/10, "Murder on the Carbon Express: Interpol Takes On Emissions Fraud," Mother Jones, M. Schapiro
==============================
11/14/10, "Climate policy distributes the world's new wealth," NZZ, am Sonntag, German press, interview with former co-chair of the UN IPCC Ottmar Edenhofer" a German economist.
----------------------------------------------
4/20/10, "Buying Carbon offsets may ease eco-guilt but not global warming," CSM, by Doug Struck.
===========================
12/4/09, "Carbon Capitalists warming to climate market using derivatives," Bloomberg
======================
6/1/11, "EIB says $7 billion carbon sale possible before year-end," Reuters, Barcelona 'Sale needs support at mid-June EU vote'
"The European Investment Bank (EIB) could start selling 300 million European Union carbon permits before the end of the year, pending support at an EU vote this month, it said on Wednesday.
"A positive vote of the rules in the next Climate Change Committee in mid-June may enable the start of the monetisation process before the end of the year, depending on final practicalities related to delivery," the EIB said in a statement.
The EIB will sell the permits on the bloc's emissions trading scheme, in a bid to raise about 5 billion euros ($7.19 billion) to support innovative low-carbon technologies including
- carbon capture and storage.
But the May vote was delayed until mid-June, thereby presumably pushing back the start date by a month or more. The EIB, however, did not specify the month the sales might start.
The sale date is important to carbon market participants, given it is equivalent to about 15 percent of the entire quota of permits, or European Union Allowances (EUAs), allocated to polluters in any one year.
The June vote will be held among climate change experts of member state governments to allow the Commission to deliver the EUAs to the EIB. It will also decide on changes to security of electronic warehousing of EUAs, or registries,
- in the wake of tax fraud and cyber thefts.
=============================
12/10/09, "$7.4 billion lost from carbon trading fraud in Europe." NY Times Green blog
------------------------------------------------
12/28/10, "Europol Arrests More Than 100 In Carbon Trading Fraud," P. Gosselin, NoTricksZone
"Here’s more proof that trading of CO2 emission certificates is fraught with fraud and attracts seedy criminal organizations – all costing the consumers and taxpayers billions.
Worse yet, it has spread out of control and appears that the authorities can’t keep up."...
-----------------------------------------------
10/8/10, "Murder on the Carbon Express: Interpol Takes on Emissions Fraud," Mother Jones, by Mark Schapiro
==============================
Even the World Bank says 20% of costs in Indonesia go to corruption.
11/19/12, "White House Announces $6 Billion to Promote Clean Energy – in Asia," CNS News, Lucas
"The White House announced the federal government will spend $6 billion over four years for a “sustainable energy future” plan with Asian countries that involves loaning tax dollars to other countries to increase their purchasing power for U.S. technology, services and equipment.
“Recognizing that energy and the environment are among the most pressing issues confronting our region, President Obama, in partnership with Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei and President of the Republic of Indonesia Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, today proposed the U.S.-Asia Pacific Comprehensive Partnership for a Sustainable Energy Future,” the White House announced Tuesday as Obama visits Asian Pacific countries."...
=================================
The UK Guardian also floats the idea that even alleged "Republicans" are starting to surrender to the idea of a "CO2 tax" though the author doesn't name a single elected Republican. Another article suggests that 'vanity and egotism,' jealousy of the Tea Party, are all that's motivating this alleged movement:
7/13/12, "George Shultz Endorses Carbon Tax – You Were Surprised?" GlobalWarming.org, Marlo Lewis
"But there has always been a wing of the GOP — the “establishment,” “Country Club,” or “Rockefeller” Republicans — who care more about controlling the party than about advancing liberty or even about winning elections. AEI’s Ken Green (a colleague of Hassett’s) hits the nail on the head. In a story on Shultz’s endorsement of carbon taxes, Green told Climatewire: (subscrip):
“There seems to be an eruption of conservatives — very moderate-seeming conservatives, non-tea party, old country club-style conservatives — who are suddenly enamored of carbon tax,” said Kenneth Green, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
“I think this is mostly vanity and egotism on the part of these people who are coming forward, to try and reassert the Republican establishment over the tea party revolution,” he added. “I wouldn’t be surprised if we have more of these guys weigh in.” (begin parag. 11)...As noted here, earlier this week, former Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) launched a new institute with Rockefeller Family Fund backing [oil money]
to promote carbon taxes as a ‘Republican idea.’
Inglis said nothing to suggest that he views carbon taxes as an alternative to EPA’s greenhouse gas regulations, or that one of his objectives is to rein in the agency and return control over climate policy to the people’s representatives."
==========================
Billionaire NYC Mayor Bloomberg is substantially invested in the CO2 industry. NY billionaires can't get off the CO2 train because it helped them get where they are now, that is world saviors:
8/14/12, "Carbon Taxes Cut Debt, Cool Planet," Bloomberg Editors
"The basic concept of a carbon tax enjoys support from a majority of Americans, including many Republicans. Former Representative Bob Inglis, a South Carolia Republican, recently started a think tank to build support for a carbon tax, and the conservative American Enterprise Institute has joined Brookings and the International Monetary Fund in an initiative to explore one. Greg Mankiw of Harvard University and Glenn Hubbard of Columbia University, two top economic advisers to presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, have been vocal proponents, along with Arthur Laffer, a former economic adviser to President Ronald Reagan."...
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bloomberg's proof that a "majority" of Americans support a "carbon tax" is a summary of an online poll from March 2012.
First, one of the poll's sponsors, George Mason University, also sponsors Bob Inglis and Art Laffer whom Bloomberg cites as 'proof' that Republicans want a carbon tax. (Laffer voted for Bill Clinton twice and thinks Obama is a fine human being).
Second, Bloomberg doesn't mention that failed "Republican" Bob Inglis is being backed in his new anti-fossil fuel career by fossil fuel billionaire David Rockefeller.
Third, the poll doesn't substantiate what Bloomberg claims, ie that most people are open to a new tax, in this case a "carbon tax."
On page 28 when the topic of a tax on fossil fuels is mentioned, respondents are told the "new tax" wouldn't really be a new tax anyway, that federal income tax revenues would simply be diverted and re-named a "tax on fossil fuels." Even if you believed one online poll was sufficient proof that hundreds of millions of Americans are willing to pay an extra tax for something, that isn't what this poll finds. It merely finds that some people wouldn't mind an accounting procedure moving some funds from federal income tax receipts and labeling them a 'fossil fuel tax' that 'would create jobs:'
pdf, page 28: "Would you be more or less likely to vote for a candidate who supports legislation to reduce the federal income tax that Americans pay each year, but increase taxes on coal, oil, and natural gas by an equal amount? This tax shift would be "revenue neutral" (meaning the total amount of taxes collected by the government would stay the same), and would create jobs and decrease pollution.
- Nat’l Avg Dem Ind Rep N/P
- Much more likely 28 37 28 15 31
- Somewhat more likely 33 37 32 36 21
- It would make no difference in my vote 20 13 18 24 31
- Somewhat less likely 10 9 10 13 12
- Much less likely 9 4 12 12 5"...
The article doesn't provide a breakdown of demographics of the online poll, or how respondents defined "global warming" or "carbon," or if they were asked to do so. Are respondents made aware that US CO2 has already dropped significantly since at least 2006 and is going lower?
Are respondents made aware they already pay billions yearly for what is scientifically known to be a non-existent
problem in the US? The title of Bloomberg's editorial speaks of 'cutting debt' but the poll it cites says taxes wouldn't be increased.
On page 28 it clearly asks respondents about a "revenue neutral" shift of existing income tax dollars to "fossil fuel tax" dollars. Just an accounting matter. Not normally a matter for federal elections.
-------------------------
Source: "Climate Change in the American Mind: Public Support for Climate & Energy Policies
in March 2012," Yale Project on Climate Change Communication and George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication. (Note: George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication also sponsors Bob Inglis and Art Laffer carbon tax programs).
2/11/2008, Mayor Bloomberg addresses UN General Assembly about terrors of man-caused climate change, reuters photo
-------------------------------------
If all this is just an accounting matter, why is David Rockefeller involved with it?
.
No comments:
Post a Comment