Sacrificing the Economy for Climate Change

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Patrick J. Michaels, senior fellow in environmental studiespmichaels@cato.org:

Newspapers covering the Boxer-Kerry climate bill are reporting that the legislation suddenly faces long odds in the U.S. Senate.

That may be an understatement. Why should the U.S. Senate vote into law a bill that, even if followed by the industrialized nations who adopted the failed Kyoto Protocol, would only reduce global temperature a mere seven percent? Why should they risk their seats when this climate measure would cost untold trillions of dollars and condemn future generations to a reduced standard of living, with no appreciable environmental gain?

Key senators know that global warming science is hardly "settled." New reports are appearing regularly in science journals showing that primitive computer models have overestimated global warming, and that economic growth—and, indeed, human life expectancy—is highly correlated with our current mix of energy technologies. Carbon dioxide emissions in 2009 will be far beneath those of last year for one reason only: economic decline.

It is a mystery why the Obama administration and leaders in Congress would push ahead with the Boxer-Kerry measure. Why would the voting public swallow this bitter and pointless medicine now, as jobless totals mount and homes are foreclosed?

Upcoming Studies