Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Go fuck yourself Dante. Finally got out on forum parole? Rep comments are not protected.
get a life.
and out on parole?
I have little desire to post often here. I was able to post quite a while ago, but to who? Idiots like you?
I have little desire to post often here.
If you let government tell you which energy to use, and how much, you are a serf.
Hyperbole is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole
Thanks to the tea party, now lets go drill some deepwater wells.
I know facts are stubborn things for you cons, but how about a link backing up your goofy assertion in the thread title?
Or, failing that, how about showing the forum how much proven oil there is for these "deepwater wells" you advocate?
Bah, to hell with the data. Let's just dig a whole lot of dry holes all over the place, and hope something springs up. That's not expensive or anything.
Thanks to the tea party, now lets go drill some deepwater wells.
I know facts are stubborn things for you cons, but how about a link backing up your goofy assertion in the thread title?
Or, failing that, how about showing the forum how much proven oil there is for these "deepwater wells" you advocate?
Bah, to hell with the data. Let's just dig a whole lot of dry holes all over the place, and hope something springs up. That's not expensive or anything.
Conservative nitwits who hang out here and all over the web have no clue about cap and trade
democrats are running away from Obama's limosine liberal agenda, survival is > party loyalty.
Obama will have to dive to the bottom of the ocean to retrive it as his minions are done.
democrats are running away from Obama's limosine liberal agenda, survival is > party loyalty.
Obama will have to dive to the bottom of the ocean to retrive it as his minions are done.
Boy, you people are soo mixed up, I'm really getting worried about the House.
We have about five more years at the outside to do something. Kenneth Watt, ecologist
Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind. George Wald, Harvard Biologist
We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation. Barry Commoner, Washington University biologist
Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction. New York Times editorial, the day after the first Earth Day
Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years. Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist
By [1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s. Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist
It is already too late to avoid mass starvation. Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day
Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions .By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine. Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University
Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half . Life Magazine, January 1970
At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, its only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable. Kenneth Watt, Ecologist
Stanford's Paul Ehrlich announces that the sky is falling. Air pollution is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone. Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist
We are prospecting for the very last of our resources and using up the nonrenewable things many times faster than we are finding new ones. Martin Litton, Sierra Club director
By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate that there wont be any more crude oil. Youll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill er up, buddy, and hell say, `I am very sorry, there isnt any. Kenneth Watt, Ecologist
Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct. Sen. Gaylord Nelson
The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age. Kenneth Watt, Ecologist
The CCX was the brainchild of Northwestern University business professor Richard Sandor, who used $1.1 million in grants from the Chicago-based left-wing Joyce Foundation to launch the CCX. For his efforts, Time named Sandor as one of its Heroes of the Planet in 2002 and one of its Heroes of the Environment in 2007.
The CCX seemed to have a lock on success. Not only was a young Barack Obama a board member of the Joyce Foundation that funded the fledgling CCX, but over the years it attracted such big name climate investors as Goldman Sachs and Al Gores Generation Investment Management.
The AB 32 Scoping Plan identifies a cap-and-trade program as one of the strategies California will employ to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that cause climate change. This program will help put California on the path to meet its goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, and ultimately achieving an 80% reduction from 1990 levels by 2050. Under cap-and-trade, an overall limit on GHG emissions from capped sectors will be established by the cap-and-trade program and facilities subject to the cap will be able to trade permits (allowances) to emit GHGs.
The California Air Resources Board (ARB) will work with stakeholders to design a California cap-and-trade program that is enforceable and meets the requirements of AB 32, including the need to consider any potential impacts on disproportionately impacted communities. Consistent with AB 32, ARB must adopt the cap-and-trade regulation by January 1, 2011, and the program itself must begin in 2012.
California is working closely with six other western states and four Canadian provinces through the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) to design a regional cap-and-trade program that can deliver GHG emission reductions within the region at costs lower than could be realized through a California-only program. To that end, the ARB rule development schedule is being coordinated with the WCI timeline for development of a regional cap-and-trade program.
• An up to 60 percent increase in your electricity bill according to the Southern California
Public Power Authority.1
• An 8 percent increase in your natural gas bill according to CARB's original economic
analysis.2
• $50,000 more for the price of a new home subject to the AB 32 Scoping Plan
recommendations for a zero net energy home according to an analysis by the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory.3
• $3.7 billion a year more for gasoline and diesel according to Sierra Research.4
• A $1,000-$3,000 additional cost for a new car according to CARB and automaker studies.
• According to a recent study commissioned by the AB 32 Implementation Group, the AB 32
cap-and-trade regulations with an auction tax alone would increase basic household costs by
$818 to more than $9300 per year per family. These higher costs would lead to job losses of
in the range of 76,000 per year to more than 1.6 million a year, depending upon the rate of
the new auction tax on carbon. There would be a loss about $250 billion to $350 billion over
ten years5 in economic activity, or nearly 2% of gross state product.
• The cost of allocating cap-and-trade permits would be $143 billion, at $60 per ton, between
2012 and 2020 for California government agencies and businesses according to CARB’s
Economic and Allocation Advisory Committee (EAAC).6
• CARB’s Economic and Allocation Advisory Committee found that low income families would
be particularly disadvantaged by the higher electricity, gasoline and natural gas cost
increases their report predicted would occur as a result of AB 32. In addition EAAC
-2-
stated: “AB 32 is likely to raise fuel and energy prices, and these price increases will be
reflecte4d in higher process of consumer goods.” 6
• Under a section entitled Offering Assistance to Displaced California Workers, CARB’s
Economic and Allocation Advisory Committee conceded that AB 32 would result in lost jobs
and opined: Fairness considerations suggest possibly using allowance value to fund worker
transition assistance (WTA) for any California firms’ employees who might lose their jobs or
their fulltime status due to the AB 32 greenhouse gas reduction program.” 7
• A study by the University of California, Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
found that more than three million jobs could be impacted by new AB 32 regulations and/or
a cap-and-trade program. These jobs are in manufacturing, fuel extraction, energy
generation, waste and water services. There are a high concentration of well-paying, bluecollar
union jobs in these sectors, and these jobs are disproportionately filled by men,
Latinos and workers with lower than average years of education. These three million jobs
represent 20% of all California jobs, and the sheer number of these jobs dwarfs the number
of jobs in new green businesses.8
• Studies of the costs of national efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are also helpful
in assessing the true costs of AB 32. In Washington D.C., great confidence is placed on the
Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) analysis of government policies. CBO found that the
national plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Lieberman-Warner) would cost American
taxpayers $1.21 trillion during the 2009 – 2018 period and would impose mandates on the
private sector that would exceed $90 billion per year during the 2012-2016 period.
California’s pro-rated portion of these costs would be roughly $156 billion during this time
frame.9
• The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) concluded this bill would result
in annual reductions of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP from roughly $1 trillion to more
than $2.8 trillion ($130-364 billion for California) in 2050. Gasoline prices would increase by
$0.53 per gallon in 2030 and by $1.40 per gallon in 2050.10
• The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Joint Program on the Science and Policy of
Global Change examined several Congressional proposals to limit carbon emissions using
their Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model. For S.2191, MIT found that, by
2020, S.2191 will lower expected GDP by nearly 1% (range of estimates is -.69% – -.78%) or
by between $136 billion and $154 billion ($18-20 billion for California).11
oOo
1
Thanks to the tea party, now lets go drill some deepwater wells.
I know facts are stubborn things for you cons, but how about a link backing up your goofy assertion in the thread title?
Or, failing that, how about showing the forum how much proven oil there is for these "deepwater wells" you advocate?
Bah, to hell with the data. Let's just dig a whole lot of dry holes all over the place, and hope something springs up. That's not expensive or anything.
Goverment making you too poor to afford your utilities solves nothing, but creating more serfs.
Indentured servitude is precisely what 1-2%'ers want.
Unfortunately, energy tax is no guarantee of that.
Being required to go on welfare to pay for your utilities is slavery.
Thanks to the tea party, now lets go drill some deepwater wells.
I know facts are stubborn things for you cons, but how about a link backing up your goofy assertion in the thread title?
Or, failing that, how about showing the forum how much proven oil there is for these "deepwater wells" you advocate?
Bah, to hell with the data. Let's just dig a whole lot of dry holes all over the place, and hope something springs up. That's not expensive or anything.
And once again, for like the 12th time since I joined this site and began posting on this topic, there is no response for how much oil the USGS or any other entity believes is even down there. Not even a rudimentary effort to examine the data and provide what you "drill baby drill" Palin worshipers advocate over and over again. That's because there are no significant finds down there, and the volume data just isn't there to be produced.
I guess what we can surmise is that you guys don't care that there's barely a few weeks of crude under our seas. All's that matters is that you force the initiative of blindly drilling holes everywhere and anywhere. To hell with the costs.
To cons, facts truly are stubborn things.
Goverment making you too poor to afford your utilities solves nothing, but creating more serfs.
The basic premise of cap-and-trade is that government doesn't tell polluters how to clean up their act...Getting all this to work in the real world required a leap of faith. The opportunity came with the 1988 election of George H.W. Bush. EDF president Fred Krupp phoned Bush's new White House counsel—Boyden Gray—and suggested that the best way for Bush to make good on his pledge to become the "environmental president" was to fix the acid rain problem, and the best way to do that was by using the new tool of emissions trading.
Read more: The Political History of Cap and Trade | Science & Nature | Smithsonian Magazine
