Excuses, Excuses

Daniel J Weiss lists "Ten Industry Arguments Against Action on Global Warming ... and Why They Are Wrong" at the website of the Center for American Progress.

Here's one argument, and rebuttal:

5. The Climate Security Act will wreck the economy.

The Climate Security Act would have almost no negative effect on long-term economic growth, according to a number of economic models. The Environmental Defense Fund analyzed the EPA’s evaluation of the Senate Environment Committee version of the bill, and concluded that, “under business as usual, the total output of the U.S. economy is projected to reach $26 trillion in January 2030. With a cap on greenhouse gases, the economy will get there by April.”

In fact, it could stimulate the economy via its tax cut, its investments in efficiency and clean-energy technologies, and its creation of clean-energy jobs. Indeed, transformation of our fossil fuel-based energy system toward one that relies on efficiency and renewables to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is perhaps the greatest engine for American innovation, productivity growth, and job creation in the coming decades.

For nine more weak excuses, check out the full article.

Brad Plumer, at The New Republic's excellent Environment and Energy blog, says the Democrats are flubbing the climate change debate. Looks like there are not enough votes to close out a filibuster, let alone overturn a veto. Brad has concluded that the bill doesn't go far enough - too many compromises to reduce the cost - but his main complaint seems to be the disarray among Democrats - and that the bill is looking like a potential political disaster.

Are we really going to wait another year to deal with this threat?

| +Save/Share | |