Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration is expected this month to release a plan to combat global warming that recommends raising petroleum prices [i.e. a TAX] and requiring industries to report, for the first time, their greenhouse gas emissions. The increase in gas prices would fund research into alternative fuels. Nine months ago, Schwarzenegger garnered international headlines by calling for California to mount an aggressive effort to address global warming. Now he faces the difficult part: shepherding new policies into place that could affect [COST]every car owner, farmer and big industry in the state.
The proposal, drafted by the governor's senior environmental advisers, has both business groups and clean-air advocates girding for a fight in Sacramento that could have profound national environmental and political implications. With President Bush reluctant to steer federal policy toward lowering greenhouse gas emissions, states and cities have taken the lead on what most environmentalists agree is the most critical issue facing the planet. "What you're considering in California is much broader than anything being discussed in other states -- it's very significant,'' said Ned Helme, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Clean Air Policy, a nonprofit environmental think tank.
For Schwarzenegger, global warming could be a tricky political issue this year. Sources at the state Environmental Protection Agency -- which is charged with writing the recommendations to achieve Schwarzenegger's goals -- say the proposal will call for a new charge on petroleum equal to less than a penny per gallon of gasoline. Conservative activists have begun to complain about the idea, branding it a gas tax. The proposal could be released just before the state Republican Convention, which begins Feb. 24, where GOP activists already are preparing to debate resolutions condemning other Schwarzenegger proposals they disagree with.
And environmentalists, who have had a rocky relationship with the governor, will watch closely this year to see if Schwarzenegger is willing to champion changes likely to be opposed by some of the governor's big-business allies. Many in the environmental movement complain that Schwarzenegger has done far more talking about clean-air policies than enacting them. "So far, it's been policy by press release,'' said V. John White, executive director of the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies. "The key is whether the governor will stand by these proposals and actually do them.'' ....
Schwarzenegger instructed a team of administration officials, led by state EPA head Alan Lloyd, to compile a report detailing how emissions could be cut. A draft of the report was published in December; the final version is expected to be released by the end of this month. The draft report listed dozens of options -- many already under way -- to lower emissions, ranging from requiring farmers to change the way they handle animal manure to ramping up the state's use of the wind and sun to generate electricity. The report will be delivered to the governor's office and the Legislature. Many of the proposals would have to be enacted through legislation. The report noted that the state faces numerous problems, from less water to increased strength and frequency of storms, if it does not act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It also argued that stimulating innovative technologies to reduce pollution can create jobs and save consumers money.
Among the report's recommendations are two that are likely to become hot-button issues in Sacramento: adding a so-called public goods charge [TAX] on gasoline and requiring industries like cement makers, electricity generators and oil refineries to report their greenhouse gas emissions. Industries are regulated with respect to many emissions, such as sulfur dioxide, but don't face the same controls on greenhouse gases. The added charge on gasoline would pay for research into alternative fuels and other ways to make cars more fuel-efficient....
Business groups say further driving up the price of fuel will hurt the economy. "I think if you look at most polling, Californians want their taxes on gas to go toward improving the transportation system, not toward something that might marginally improve carbon emissions,'' said Allan Zaremberg, president of the California Chamber of Commerce, which is spearheading a new coalition called Sustainable Environment and Economy for California, or SEECalifornia, that intends to represent business interests as the global warming initiative progresses.
Zaremberg said the new business coalition will argue that many of the ideas in the draft report would do little to address global warming. He noted that restricting cement makers, for example, could lead manufacturers to leave the state. "You're not going to reduce the demand for cement, you'll just move the production to China or Arizona or anywhere else with fewer restrictions,'' he said. "Then you have a situation that is actually worse for global warming, with lesser environmental standards than California already has, and you add in the truck traffic needed to get the cement back to California.'' .....
What Schwarzenegger will do with the final report remains to be seen. Many clean-air advocates were disappointed that the governor didn't mention the issue in his State of the State speech last month.....
More here
WORLD LEADER IN CLIMATE ALARMISM WILL FAIL TO MEET ITS KYOTO OBLIGATIONS
Reality bites even in ideologically fanatical Britain
The Government admitted yesterday that Britain will miss its global warming targets by a huge margin because of rising levels of greenhouse gas emissions from heavy industry. Figures published by the Department for Trade and Industry reveal carbon emissions from the power generation industry and heavy users of energy such as iron and steel, chemicals and glass manufacturers are likely to be far above the targets the UK has signed up to, both voluntarily and under the Kyoto Protocol.
The DTI's projections show carbon dioxide emissions from industry are likely to average at least 263 million tons and possibly as much as 270 million tons a year between 2008 and 2012. That compares with the 245 million tons UK industry is allowed to emit under the European Union's current emissions scheme.
A DTI spokeswoman said the UK's total carbon dioxide emissions, including the contribution from homes, cars and air travel, was now expected to total some 529 million tons by 2010. That is 10.6 per cent below their level in 1990 - but compared with the Government's own target of a 20 per cent cut - or even the 12 per cent reduction required to meet Kyoto, they are not meeting requirements.
In 2004, the projection for total CO2 emissions in 2010 was 518 million tons, suggesting the UK is getting further and further away from meeting its targets.......
The Independent, 18 February 2006
BRITISH CLOWNS FORECAST CLIMATE - FOR THE YEAR 3000!
Let them get tomorrow's weather right first
The UK could face major flooding and tropical temperatures by the year 3000 if greenhouse gas emissions are not sharply reduced, a new study says. The report, from the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, claims Britain could look radically different with sea levels rising as much as 11.4m. The study was commissioned by the Environment Agency. However, other researchers cautioned that it was extremely difficult to make climate forecasts so far in advance. The study, which was led from the University of East Anglia (UEA), modelled the climate impacts of three possible scenarios.....
BBC News Online, 16 February 2006
You couldn't make this up: Now even the U.K. ban on smoking causes global warming!
War declared on patio heaters
As campaigners cheer a total smoking ban, there are fears sending smokers outside will lead to a huge increase in greenhouse gas-emitting patio heaters. Labour MP Stephen Pound said when he visited Ireland recently - where a smoking ban is already in force - pub gardens were "covered" in the heaters. Britain's greenhouse gas emissions are already up by 380,000 tonnes a year due to such devices, it is claimed.
Lib Dem Norman Baker advised smokers to "enjoy the bracing air" instead. The BBC's environment correspondent Roger Harrabin said patio heaters have become a "beacon of aspiration" for those keen on enjoying outdoor dining, in the UK's unpredictable climate.
During Tuesday's smoking debate in the Commons Ealing North MP Mr Pound told members of his recent trip to Temple Bar area of Dublin, where a smoking ban in public places is already in force. "What an extraordinary sight greeted me when, with a number of my Parliamentary colleagues and several members of the Dail, I visited a number of pubs to find that all of them fell into one or other of two categories. "Either the entire perimeter area was covered with patio heaters and armchairs so that anybody who wanted to go into the admittedly smoke-free pub had to fight their way through a tangible fug of nicotine-soaked air to get into the damned place in the first place, which makes something of a nonsense of it," said Mr Pound, who has vowed to give up smoking following the ban vote.
Health campaigners have welcomed a vote paving the way for a ban on smoking in all pubs, clubs and restaurants in England, which will come into effect from the summer of 2007 following a free vote by MPs. But the increased use of patio heaters is also of growing concern to some politicians. Labour's Desmond Turner, MP for Brighton Kemptown, wants to ban them completely, calling them a "waste of energy". He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "The use of patio heaters accounts for about one million tonnes of CO2 emissions a year, which immediately cancels out, for instance, the savings made by government changes to vehicle taxations."
Liberal Democrat environment spokesman Norman Baker agreed that patio heaters were a "waste of resources" and "doomed to failure". He told the BBC News website: "If I see patio heaters I try to make the point in a barbed comment to the person using it. "I'm not against people smoking outside, it's better than them smoking inside, but I think they should enjoy the bracing air around them." He later said the government should establish an effective strategy, such as selling patio heaters with "health warning" style labels. "Patio heaters are an absurd invention. It is ludicrous that people are trying to heat the open air, as well as being irresponsible in the light of the climate change challenge we face. "Instead of reaching for the gas canister people should reach for another jumper instead," he added.
Parliamentary questions by Mr Baker have revealed Britain's greenhouse gas emissions are up by 380,000 tonnes a year due to patio heaters. Using a patio heater for two hours produces the same amount of carbon dioxide as a car produces in an average day, it is claimed.
But smokers' campaign group Forest hit back. Director Simon Clark said any notion of banning patio heaters was "barking mad". He said the moved smacked of "petty vindictiveness" towards smokers. "Is it that these MPs simply do not like the idea that smokers might be moderately comfortable smoking outdoors?" he asked. He said the damage to the environment from patio heaters was "minuscule" in terms of the overall effect.
BBC News Online, 16 February 2006
Gutting Kyoto: "The worldwide press hailed the December negotiations in Montreal over the Kyoto Protocol for producing an 'historic climate agreement.' As the London Independent put it, 'The fight against catastrophic global warming scored its greatest success to date yesterday, when negotiators from more than 180 nations unexpectedly agreed to develop far-reaching measures.' The agreement truly was historic as the greatest modification of Kyoto's terms since its inception in 1997 -- although not for the reasons The Independent and other hailers proclaimed. The agreement effectively guts Kyoto's claim to being 'legally binding' and its potentially onerous provisions."
***************************************
Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else, truth regardless.
Global warming has taken the place of Communism as an absurdity that "liberals" will defend to the death regardless of the evidence showing its folly. Evidence never has mattered to real Leftists
Comments? Email me here. My Home Page is here or here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there are mirrors of this site here and here.
*****************************************
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment