I have listened with interest to Rep. John Curtis present the Conservative Climate Caucus to address global warming. I am not persuaded.
The GOP has a problem. The Republican Party’s hope for the future, the younger generations, are convinced that human-caused global warming is a serious threat. Republicans must address this issue to remain relevant.
The catch is, the GOP will only do it in a way that doesn’t interfere with their view of free-market capitalism. That is what has led to the “Citizen’s Climate Caucus,” which attempts to give cover to Republican politicians when addressing global warming.
To dispose of a couple red herrings that the CCC uses, first: Of course, the policies of Russia, China, India, and the rest of the world are also seriously degrading our climate. But we only have control over the fossil fuels that the U.S. owns. Just because other countries are not doing as much as they should, is that a reason for U.S. to not do what we can? America needs to be a world leader, to try and set an example that other countries can look to with hope.
As far as “innovation” and “carbon sequestration technologies” go, it’s all magical thinking, the policy equivalent of carrying a rabbit’s foot. However, there’s an important point about such possibilities that I’ll return to.
Curtis has said that burning fossil fuels “will help us lower emissions.” What he means is that we’ll continue to see natural gas (which releases less CO2) replace coal. We will still be digging ourselves into a hole, but at a slower rate. If in addition to that we would stop burning a similar amount of the worst fossil fuels, then it would be a permanent improvement.
However, it seems obvious that Curtis intends to promote fossil fuels in “business as usual.” He doesn’t even intend to permanently sideline coal. It’s just a shell game: “We’ll burn the natural gas and put fewer emissions out temporarily, but we’re eventually going to come back and burn that coal.” There is no net benefit. I wait to be corrected.
In contrast, if we do refuse to use our worst fuels, and practical carbon sequestration is developed, then any unburned fuels we have left will still be available. After all, the coal, tar sands and oil shale aren’t going anywhere.
Unfortunately, the CCC would put the same amount of CO2 into the air, it’ll just take a little longer to get there. I ask the CCC to go on record as not promoting the dirtiest of our fuels — tar sands, oil shale, and coal. That would show that they are serious.
As it stands, I conclude that the Citizen’s Climate Caucus is just a fig leaf to cover the GOP’s shameful record on climate science. It is an attempt to persuade people that they really do care. It is not about addressing global warming; it is about the electability of Republican politicians.
Tom Elder, Vernal, is a retired teacher and thinks the Laws of Conservation of Matter and Energy should get more attention.
from The Salt Lake Tribune https://ift.tt/dQYKqSR
إرسال تعليق