The Harm from “Climate Change” Policies
Climate change actions, “green new deal” and similar policies, many based on flawed, fraudulent or incomplete data are economically unrealistic, technologically unsound, and oblivious to life essential necessities.
The Hoover Institute describes massive measurement errors, a failure to take into account the role of the Sun and clouds, and the inadequacy of modelling techniques that underpin much of the arguments for green policies.
The cost of these policies, estimated to be about $5 trillion just to switch from coal, nuclear and natural gas to 100% renewables, notes the Heritage Foundation, is unrealistic. They ignore the fact that for the foreseeable future, wind and solar have little chance to provide adequate, dependable alternatives to fossil fuels. Further, these expenditures would divert funding from advancing breakthrough technologies, such as fusion power, which could revolutionize energy production. Many of the same mistaken voices who prevented the construction of pollution-free nuclear power plants are the same that push the current erroneous moves. By the way, many of the same voices that confidently spoke of global cooling are now pushing global warming with the same level of confidence and with the same disdain for those who try to bring up appropriate questions.
It is not a coincidence that this has become a political issue. Much of the policy changes advocated have more to do with adopting socialist style economic changes, despite the reality that socialist nations have had a far worse record of environmental stewardship that their capitalist counterparts. It is not a coincidence that while the United States and Europe would have to make dramatic moves to comply, China, the worlds’ worst polluter and leading socialist nation, is given a free pass.
Green advocates seek to punish advanced nations for providing the industrial revolution that has built the modern world, dramatically increased the standard of living, and provided the food that has lifted much of the planet out of starvation. They would make essential fuel unaffordable for a vast population that requires heat to prevent freezing to death, or cooling to prevent heat stroke, and the assets necessary to produce adequate food.
Recently, the New York Post reported that many wealthy politicians and climate campaigners forget that much of the planet remains mired in poverty and hunger. As such, wealthy nations are increasingly replacing their development aid with climate spending. The World Bank, whose primary goal is to help people out of poverty, has announced it will divert no less than 45% of its funding toward climate change, shifting some $40 billion annually away from poverty and hunger.
But everyone won’t be harmed from extreme green moves. Politically connected donors to Democrats have profited, as was the case in the Solyndra scandal, in which vast sums of monies went to a solar panel company that eventually went bankrupt, but not before funds were bundled on behalf of Barack Obama. Former Vice President Al Gore, notes the Daily Mail, million from climate alarmism.
Climate Realism emphasizes that “The secret of the Green New Deal is that it will make rich, politically connected elites even richer. Your average rustbelt worker will lose while those connected to politicians will win big.”
House Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH) recently stated that “ President Biden has put Americans at risk by pushing a ‘whole-of-government’ climate agenda that increases energy costs, undermines consumer choice, and strengthens America’s adversaries, especially China and Russia. This drastic and burdensome policy agenda also appears disconnected from his stated climate goals, in that many of the so-called ‘green’ energy technologies have significant environmental impacts. Even worse, the rush-to-green agenda is far from over.
For instance, I am deeply concerned with the EPA’s recent announcement on proposed standards for light-and medium-duty vehicles that would force the electrification of two-thirds of our domestic car market…Democrats and the Biden administration don’t want to examine the true costs of these policy choices to the environment, human rights, and national security in the United States and around the world…the deployment of renewable energy technologies that require clearing a significant amount of land…The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that solar panels need 5 acres of land to generate one megawatt of electricity, and wind turbines need 35 acres! To put that in context, you need thirty times the amount of land covered in solar panels to equal the capacity of one natural gas fired power plant…These same renewable energy technologies pose risks to Americans at the end-of-life stage. The International Renewable Energy Agency projects that global solar panel waste could reach 78 million tons by 2050, with anywhere from 7.5 million and 10 million tons of waste in need of disposal in the United States. The sheer amount of waste, some of which the EPA considers to be hazardous, is deeply troubling and begs the question of whether existing landfill capacity will be overwhelmed.
“And let’s consider human rights! The supply chain of critical materials essential for solar, wind, and EV batteries is tainted with forced labor, slavery, and child labor abuses. Both the State Department and the Department of Labor have acknowledged violations with more than 40,000 children engaging in ‘artisanal and small-scale mining,’ digging for cobalt with their bare hands in the Congo, as well as thousands of members of the Uyghur Muslim community forced into labor in China. We cannot be morally selective. It is our duty to ensure that American energy supply chains do not rely on slavery or child labor.
“We should also prioritize American national security rather than handing federal subsidies and American taxpayer dollars to Chinese companies. China controls 50-70% of lithium and cobalt refining, key inputs for EV batteries, as well as 90% of global refining capacity for rare earth elements.”
Follow Us