|
(Continued from the previous article, EPA Declares Greenhouse Gases a Danger)
If regulation and taxation are not the answer for improving our environment, What makes our environment better?
The answer is capitalism and free market.
Whether the global warming theory is true or false, many people around the world care about the environment. The problem is that they seek answers from governments or global organizations like the United Nations. Usually their ideas are regulations of industries and global taxation.
On the other hand, We have been improving our environment from capitalism and free market because we value our private property and natural resources. We develop our technology to use our natural resources efficently. Instead of just dumping waste materials, We create many useful materials. For example, many useful products have been created using oil such as gasoline, plastics, asphalt, diesel fuel, fuel oils, Kerosene, Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), Lubricating oils, Paraffin wax, Tar, propane, aviation jet fuel, artificial fiber, synthetic detergent, rubber, Cosmetics, medical supply, paint, ink, nylon, agricultural chemicals and Styrofoam.
Secondly, rather than reducing the carbon dioxide by spending billions of dollars, we should make higher standard of living for people in the developing countries by spreading capitalism and freemarket. The following article in the Wall Street Journal proves my point.
According to the Oxfam, if rich nations diverted $50 billion to climate change, at least 4.5 million children could die and 8.6 million fewer people could have access to HIV/AIDS treatment. And what would we get for that $50 billion? Well, spending that much on Kyoto-style carbon-emissions cuts would reduce temperatures by all of one-thousandth of one degree Fahrenheit over the next hundred years. Money spent on carbon cuts is money we can't use for effective investments in food aid, micronutrients, HIV/Aids prevention, health and education infrastructure, and clean water and sanitation. This does not mean that we should ignore global warming. But it does raise serious questions about our dogmatic pursuit of a strategy that can only be described as breathtakingly expensive and woefully ineffective.
The Wall Street Journal: Time for a Smarter Approach to Global Warming
|
|
|
Obama Administration will enforce their power with or without global warming law passed by Congress.
From FoxNews.com
The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business.
The warning, from a top White House economic official who spoke Tuesday on condition of anonymity, came on the eve of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's address to the international conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.
If the Legislative Branch cannot make the law to regulate greenhouse gas, the Executive Branch will enforce the regulation? We still have the Constitution and balance of power. If the Obama Administration can do whatever they want, why do we have to make laws? Why do we need congress? This is tyranny.
Fox News.com: Administration Warns of 'Command-and-Control' Regulation Over Emissions
|
|
The U.S. Environmental Protectioin Agency (EPA) Administrator, Lisa Jackson declared greenhouse gas a danger to public health on Monday. The decision will lead to new emissions regulations for businesses across the country and cannot avoid hurting the economy more.
The "endangerment finding" announced by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is necessary to move ahead on new emissions standards for cars due out in March 2010. Made under the Clean Air Act, it also opens up large emitters such as power plants, oil refineries, chemical plants and metal smelters to regulations that limit their output of carbon dioxide and other gases.
Some lawmakers and groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers warned the decision could bring the entire economy to a halt, not only regulating large emitters within months, but also opening other mobile sources and smaller emitters to regulation.
"With double-digit unemployment and over 3.5 million jobs already lost this year, the administration inexplicably continues to push for a job-killing national energy tax—either through legislation or regulation," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) said.
Greenhouse gas is a danger to public health? No. This is another misrepresentation and justification for controlling our way of life and  freedom. According to Wikipedia, greenhouse gases are made of water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. The main part of greenhouse gas is water vapor which contributes 36–72%. How can water vapor be a danger to public health and how can we stop water vapor? By the way, without greenhouse gases, Earth's surface would be on average about 33 °C (59 °F) colder than at present. So, it seems that we may need greenhouse gases.
We don't have any scientific proof that humans have caused global warming and we don't even know that the earth will get warmer in the future. Whether it will get warmer or colder, regulation and taxation are not the answer for improving our environment. (...Continued)
The Wall Street Journal: EPA Declares Greenhouse Gases a Danger
|
|
|
Obama Administration still believes that man-made global warming is real and Climategate is not important according to Washington Time Editorial.
President Obama's climate czar, Carol M. Browner, claims that Climategate is not important and that global warming is settled science. "[The U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has] been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real," she said last week, six days after the scandal first broke about fudged global-warming research.
Obama ignored and thus belittled the controversy when he announced that he would be attending the upcoming Copenhagen global warming conference on Dec. 7. Unfortunately, the Obama administration is disregarding the fact that the very people caught up in Climategate are the very same ones who wrote the U.N. climate report that will form the basis of discussion at Copenhagen.
Man-made global warming theory is nothing but politics from the get-go. So called scientists who proclaim the existence of global warming, as well as the politicians who support them, are seeking "green" money rather than real green. It is a shame to call them scientists especially those who hide evidence against their theories and try to destroy those who dare to dispute the existence of global warming.
Those who are elected to Congress and those who are elected or appointed to higher offices should represent the best interest of the United States and its citizens rather than seeking their own fame and fortune by scheming with scientists to influence public policy. For the sake of the environment, the economy, and the public they should be open to viewing and discussing all evidience that is brought forth, whether or not it supports global warming.
The Washington Times:EDITORIAL: Denying the global-cooling cover-up
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pdf 
Print 
Email 
