



May 10, 2010
Cap-and-Trade Is Back
By Brian Sussman                               On Wednesday, Senators John Kerry (D-MA)  and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) plan to introduce legislation designed to  inflate the cost of energy, strain family budgets, and decimate  America's manufacturing sector -- all in the name of supposedly saving  the climate.
                                                                                                   P.O. Box 607841  Orlando, FL 32860Kerry and Lieberman have been revamping  legislation that narrowly passed the House of Representatives last year.  The House bill imposes oppressive limits on carbon dioxide (CO2)  emissions and establishes a complex cap-and-trade scheme in which the  federal government determines how much CO2 a  business may emit. If a business exceeds its allowance, it may purchase  additional "carbon credits" from an exchange, where the credits will be  traded like a commodity. Rules for the exchange of carbon credits,  including the trading of carbon derivatives, are addressed in the House  bill, and my sources tell me that the Senate version will include these  same stratagems.
In an e-mail sent to the media last week  regarding their plans, Kerry and Lieberman said,  "We can no longer wait  to solve this problem which threatens our economy, our security and our  environment." 
My insiders also say the new  Kerry-Lieberman proposal will keep the House bill's goal of attaining a  17-percent reduction of greenhouse gases (below their 2005 level) by  2020. Apparently the Senate bill will allow cap-and-trade to hit power  companies first, and then within six years include the manufacturing  sector. 
The new bill apparently calls for more loan  guarantees to build nuclear plants and grants U.S. coastal states a  share of the revenue produced by any expansion of offshore oil and  natural-gas drilling.
This is a bill that will cause all  of us to suffer great loss.
Presently, 40 percent of CO2  emissions in the United States are derived from electricity generation,  35 percent from transportation, and 25 percent from business, industry,  and natural gas to heat homes.
So where will the 17% cut  come from, especially given that (according to U.S. census projections)  there will be an additional 30 million people in the United States by  2020? If the cuts are distributed proportionately, the biggest blow will  be to electricity production. Since 50 percent of our nation's  electricity is derived from coal, that industry and its customers will  be hit hardest. Coal plants are going to have to be shuttered. And what  will replace that energy resource? Nothing.  
Some might  counter that the House bill touts complex tax credits for wind and solar  development. However, when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't  shining, those two alternatives don't provide a watt of energy --  they're simply enhancements, not baseload providers. Additionally, the  Kerry-Lieberman loan giveaway for the construction of nuclear plants --  which do not generate carbon emissions -- is simply a lure to entice  gullible Republicans to bite, because the White House is not a fan of  nuclear power.
Recall that during his January State of the  Union address, Mr. Obama said that America needs to be "building a new  generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country."
In  an apparent move to make good on his promise, two days after the  speech, Bloomberg reported:  "President Barack Obama, acting on a pledge to support nuclear power,  will propose tripling guarantees for new reactors to more than $45  billion[.]" 
However, the proposal was a ruse. Many forget  that shortly after taking office Obama's first budget planned to cut  off money for the Nevada nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain --  meaning that the $10 billion in taxpayer dollars spent since 1983 to  ready Yucca for storing nuclear waste was a total loss. Yucca Mountain  will officially be zeroed out in fiscal year 2011.
Meantime,  Energy Secretary Steven Chu has announced the creation of a special  panel to find a solution for storing nuclear waste.
Problem  is, we already had a solution -- Yucca Mountain. 
America  has no nuclear option. And, as I have written  here at American Thinker, the probability of additional drilling for  domestic fossil fuels is low as well.
So where will the  carbon cuts come from? They'll come from the American people, who will  be forced to use less energy because of the higher costs imposed by  cap-and-trade and a variety of new energy taxes.
Proving  my point, last week members of Congress, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi,  took part in the Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference. One of the  better-attended seminars was entitled "Efficiency and Renewables."  Presenters included Nancy Sutley, White House Council on Environmental  Quality. According to the brochure promoting this session, "The  cheapest, cleanest, and fastest emission reductions will come from the  energy we never have to use at all. Cutting energy use also saves money  on homeowners' electricity bills and reduces costs for business."
Translation:  America does not need a plan for additional power plants to serve a  growing population; instead, the people must use less power. Coercion  through increased pricing will be a key prod in producing the societal  behavior modification necessary to accomplish this goal.
By  the way, Nancy Sutley is also the woman who announced the hiring of the  radical Van Jones in March 2009, declaring:  "Van Jones has been a strong voice for green jobs, and we look forward  to having him work with departments and agencies to advance the  President's agenda of creating 21st-century jobs that improve  energy efficiency and utilize renewable resources. Jones will also help  to shape and advance the administration's energy and climate  initiatives with a specific interest in improvements and opportunities  for vulnerable communities."
Further straining the family  budget, a new set of fees and taxes will be imposed on all sectors of  the economy that produce greenhouse gases. This will include  transportation, farming, livestock production -- even restaurants that  cook barbecued chicken and ribs over an open flame and bottling  companies that sell fizzy drinks. To absorb the increased cost of doing  business, companies large and small will be forced to raise their  prices. Already pinched personal bank accounts will be further hammered,  as virtually everything is going to cost more. 
The  Kerry-Lieberman bill is also a job-killer. To meet the demands of the  new emissions limits, the few manufacturing businesses that remain in  the United States will be further shipped overseas. This is a part of an  elitist plan to redistribute America's wealth abroad. In other words,  this legislation will purposefully execute the loss of well-paying  domestic jobs, so that those in third world and underdeveloped nations  have a chance to improve their standard of living -- at our expense.  
Proving  my point is the House version of this bill. If your manufacturing job  is shipped overseas, you are eligible for three years of unemployment  compensation at 70% of your pay, plus retraining and relocation  expenses. The intent is to pacify your anger with a three-year paid  vacation.
And another dirty little secret about the  Democrats' need to pass cap-and-trade: It's a revenue-builder.   According the Wall  Street Journal, the cap-and-trade system could actually generate  between roughly $1.3 trillion and $1.9 trillion between fiscal years  2012 and 2019.
This so-called energy bill is a punch to  the gut that American does not need. And keep in mind, as I have  conclusively proven through past missives at American Thinker, as well  as in my book Climategate, that the temperature of the earth is  not warming, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, and without the  greenhouse effect, planet Earth would be a big ball of ice. 
To  pass, cap-and-trade will need bipartisan support. Thus far only  Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Susan Collins (R-ME) have spoken out  in favor of supporting a mandatory cap on greenhouse gases.
However,  other Senate Republicans who could cross over and support this bill are  Olympia Snowe of Maine, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, George LeMieux of  Florida, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, and the retiring George Voinovich  of Ohio. 
Brian Sussman is author of the new  bestseller, "Climategate:  a veteran meteorologist exposes the global warming scam,"  and host of the Morning Show on KSFO  radio in San Francisco.
Also;
Space and Science Research Center
                                                         Also;
Space and Science Research Center
www.spaceandscience.net
407-394-9089
Press Release SSRC 2-2010
Food and Ethanol Shortages Imminent as Earth Enters New Cold Climate Era
Monday, May 10, 2010
11:30 AM
The Space and Science Research Center (SSRC), the leading independent research organization in the United States on the subject of the next climate change, issues today the following warning of imminent crop damage expected to produce food and ethanol shortages for the US and Canada:
Over the next 30 months, global temperatures are expected to make another dramatic drop even greater than that seen during the 2007-2008 period. As the Earth’s current El Nino dissipates, the planet will return to the long term temperature decline brought on by the Sun’s historic reduction in output, the on-going “solar hibernation.” In follow-up to the specific global temperature forecast posted in SSRC Press Release 4-2009, the SSRC advises that in order to return to the long term decline slope from the current El Nino induced high temperatures, a significant global cold weather re-direction must occur. According to SSRC Director John Casey, “The Earth typically makes adjustments in major temperature spikes within two to three years. In this case as we cool down from El Nino, we are dealing with the combined effects of this planetary thermodynamic normalization and the influence of the more powerful underlying global temperature downturn brought on by the solar hibernation. Both forces will present the first opportunity since the period of Sun-caused global warming period ended to witness obvious harmful agricultural impacts of the new cold climate. Analysis shows that food and crop derived fuel will for the first time, become threatened in the next two and a half years. Though the SSRC does not get involved with short term weather prediction, it would not be unusual to see these ill-effects this year much less within the next 30 months.”
The SSRC further adds that the severity of this projected near term decline may be on the order of 0.9 C to 1.1 C from present levels. Surprising cold weather fronts will adversely impact all northern grain crops including of course wheat and the corn used in ethanol for automotive fuel.
In pointing out the importance and reliability of this new temperature forecast and its effects on North American crops, Director Casey adds,” The SSRC has been the only US independent research organization to correctly predict in advance three of the most important events in all of climate science history. We accurately announced beforehand, the end of global warming, a long term drop in the Earth’s temperatures and most importantly the advent of a historic drop in the Sun’s output, a solar hibernation. The US government’s leading science organizations, NASA and NOAA have completely missed all three, as of course have United Nations climate change experts. It is only because of the amount of expected criticism we received because of our strong opposition to the Obama administration’s climate change policies and our declaration of the end of global warming, that the SSRC is not more fully accepted for its leadership role in climate change forecasting. The facts and reliability surrounding our well publicized predictions however stand as testament to the SSRC’s proven ability to understand the nature of global climate change. In view of the importance of this new forecast I have notified the Secretary of Agriculture to take immediate actions to prepare the nation’s agricultural industry for the coming crop damage.”
The SSRC places only one caveat on this forecast. Casey elaborates, “Only a stronger solar cycle with a period longer than the 206 year cycle can cause us to alter our projections. Although more research is needed in this area, none have yet shown themselves. The present hibernation is proceeding in almost lock step as the last one which occurred from 1793 to 1830. If it continues on present course, while the cold weather impacts on food and fuel announced today are certainly important, they do not compare with what is to follow later. At the bottom of the cold cycle of this hibernation in the late 2020’s and 2030’s there will likely be years with devastating to total crop losses in the Canadian and northern US grain regions.”
Letter to USDA Secretary Vilsack
Press Release SSRC 1-2010
SSRC Research Report 1-2010 (Preliminary)
Press Release SSRC 5-2009
Letter To Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Members
Press Release SSRC 4-2009
Press Release SSRC 3-2009
Letter to SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro
Press Release SSRC 2-2009
Press Release SSRC 1-2009
http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html
 
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment