There is a Global Warming debate going on. There is no uniform agreement on whether the weather is warming or cooling. There are movies and articles and debates and scientific arguments and both sides claim that the other side’s science is faulty, or missed some pertinent facts or is just made up. There is some official report by the IPCC that all scientists are supposed to agree on [proving global warming], except for the ones who have asked to have their names removed, and the one who had to threaten to sue before his name was removed. Oh, and Mars has Global Warming too, you know, from all the fossil fuels the Martians are burning.

Regardless of what side you are on, there are problems all over. If you are for curbing greenhouse gases, specifically CO2 emissions, then the Kyoto Protocol is not really working because it already excludes China and India from having to participate in the emissions reductions. They will by far be the largest polluting nations in the world, but they also could really use the electricity for their continued industrialization.

So, when the people of the United States won’t voluntarily curb their CO2 emissions, what do you do? Try to enact new laws and regulations through the EPA, that’s what. Even if you have to sue and get the Supreme Court to tell the EPA to either regulate CO2 or come up with a better explanation for why they won’t.

You can also sue the Federal Government for not following the National Environmental Policy Act when funding foreign projects and evaluating their possible impact on global warming.

Or maybe you could be like Iowa and join seven other states in suing the top five power companies in the United States because of their CO2 emissions.

If that won’t solve the problem, it appears that the next solution is to simply advocate for some kind of Global Carbon Tax to force people to reduce their consumption of products that produce CO2 emissions.

This column has written about the personal habits of the Goracle in spite of his professed belief in global warming. Also about the other side of the global warming story.

If the current trends are taken to their logical conclusions, we are all in trouble. If the EPA must further force reductions in CO2 emissions, power plants must reduce their emissions, a Global Carbon Tax is imposed, and all of the corresponding increases in costs that go along with them, it will only further entrench the haves and have-nots. Only the rich will be able to afford air conditioning, or to drive a large vehicle with bad gas mileage, or so many other things. Most of the actions being taken will only hamper the United States economy and the people who have to live with it. One alternative that is not on the table is replacing coal fired power plants with atomic power plants.

It is fair to say that the jury is still out on global warming and whether it is caused by human actions. There are so many other natural causes that it is almost silly to take these draconian measures to stop what may be a natural phenomenon. The earth came out of the last ice age without power plants or human intervention. The earth was warmer in Roman times than it is now (according to historical records).

Global Warming is now a hammer for people to use against further industrial development. It is not just a pet theory of environmentalists and other self-proclaimed friends of the earth, it is an idea that is having real-world consequences. It is worth paying attention to.

Comments Welcome