Center Right Commentary - Live FeedBreaking News - Live Feed
Fighting Climate Change Will Have No Effect but American Job Losses
by Daniel Kite on April 20, 2009
We have repeatedly warned that any action to curb carbon emissions in the United States will lead to great economic hardship in our country and will result in no change to worldwide carbon emissions. The immense cost of these reductions will result in hundreds of thousands of American jobs moving overseas where environmental standards and cheap labor will remain plentiful. In “Bound to Burn”, Peter Huber takes a hard look at the actual costs of reducing carbon emissions in the US and outlines why it will make no difference. In part he writes:
Rich people can’t stop the world’s 5 billion poor people from burning the couple of trillion tons of cheap carbon that they have within easy reach. We can’t even make any durable dent in global emissions—because emissions from the developing world are growing too fast, because the other 80 percent of humanity desperately needs cheap energy, and because we and they are now part of the same global economy. What we can do, if we’re foolish enough, is let carbon worries send our jobs and industries to their shores, making them grow even faster, and their carbon emissions faster still.
We don’t control the global supply of carbon.
Ten countries ruled by nasty people control 80 percent of the planet’s oil reserves—about 1 trillion barrels, currently worth about $40 trillion. If $40 trillion worth of gold were located where most of the oil is, one could only scoff at any suggestion that we might somehow persuade the nasty people to leave the wealth buried. They can lift most of their oil at a cost well under $10 a barrel. They will drill. They will pump. And they will find buyers. Oil is all they’ve got.
Poor countries all around the planet are sitting on a second, even bigger source of carbon—almost a trillion tons of cheap, easily accessible coal. They also control most of the planet’s third great carbon reservoir—the rain forests and soil. They will keep squeezing the carbon out of cheap coal, and cheap forest, and cheap soil, because that’s all they’ve got. Unless they can find something even cheaper. But they won’t—not any time in the foreseeable future.
We no longer control the demand for carbon, either. The 5 billion poor—the other 80 percent—are already the main problem, not us. Collectively, they emit 20 percent more greenhouse gas than we do. We burn a lot more carbon individually, but they have a lot more children. Their fecundity has eclipsed our gluttony, and the gap is now widening fast. China, not the United States, is now the planet’s largest emitter. Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Africa, and others are in hot pursuit. And these countries have all made it clear that they aren’t interested in spending what money they have on low-carb diets. It is idle to argue, as some have done, that global warming can be solved—decades hence—at a cost of 1 to 2 percent of the global economy. Eighty percent of the global population hasn’t signed on to pay more than 0 percent.
Fighting Climate Change Will Have No Effect but American Job Losses
by Daniel Kite on April 20, 2009
We have repeatedly warned that any action to curb carbon emissions in the United States will lead to great economic hardship in our country and will result in no change to worldwide carbon emissions. The immense cost of these reductions will result in hundreds of thousands of American jobs moving overseas where environmental standards and cheap labor will remain plentiful. In “Bound to Burn”, Peter Huber takes a hard look at the actual costs of reducing carbon emissions in the US and outlines why it will make no difference. In part he writes:
You can read the entire story here.
Sphere: Related ContentLeave a Comment