You are a true believer. Now tell me how to address conflicting climate goals.
MIT and Harvard Scientists Say Global Warming Causes More CO2
This morning I did a post on climate change. Please see MIT and Harvard Scientists Say Global Warming Causes More CO2, Not the Opposite
My post brought out the usual barrage of nonsense, all of it missing my key point.
I added an addendum to the post, but then decided it needs to stand alone to stop the bickering about what percentage of clime change is manmade.
For this post let’s all assume that 100 percent of climate change is manmade.
Everyone put your head into that belief, at least for the moment. OK. Mish is now a true believer and so are you, for the duration of this post.
In return for accepting the science, I impose requited reading. It will take all of seven minutes to play the video.
Brilliant Acceptance of Climate Change
Please Consider an Absolutely Brilliant Speech by British Satirist, Konstantine Kisin
You cannot comment or object to this post unless you play that video. After playing the video, please address the conflicts.
I added the section below on conflicting goals as part of an addendum to my previous post, but I expand further on my addendum here.
Conflicting Goals
- Fix the environment
- Force the world to fix the environment
- Buy US
- Build US
- Appease the unions
- Appease the environmentalists who don’t want mines in the US
- All of the above needs to happen at a cost that consumers are willing to pay without political backlash
- The conflicting regulations are so intense that nothing is getting done.
Explanations Needed None Delivered
No one has explained yet where we get the minerals for batteries, or at what cost to the environment when we have little to no mining or refining capacity in the US.
No one has factored in the carbon requirements of mining whether in China or the US.
No one has factored in grid upgrade costs.
No one has figured out how to appease consumers who want cheaper cars and the unions who accurately see that EVs are going to reduce jobs.
We have global goals but China has refused to go along. No one has looked ahead to what happens when India and Africa industrialize.
In regard to point seven, the administration has allocated tens of billions of dollars to put in chargers, and in two years has put in a grand total of seven. The same is happening with high-speed internet mandates of the preposterous Inflation Reduction Act.
It is is tough enough to have one direct goal and get it done. It is virtually impossible when you have eight conflicting parts and you need the whole rest of the world to cooperate.
China is the leader in EVs hooray! But it is still building coal plants to charge the cars and refine the minerals.
The EU is backing off climate goals when the alarmists say we need to double or triple them or the word will end as we know it.
Reasonable Things We Could Do
- Stop setting ridiculous conflicting mandates that make it impossible to get anything done
- Encourage more hybrids
- Mothball coal plants for natural gas
- Allow more imports of EVs from China
- Rapidly promote nuclear
- Scrap buy America
- Have no more than enough kids to hold the global population steady
I am in favor of all of those. But guess what. Biden isn’t, Harris isn’t, China isn’t, Trump isn’t, and the EU isn’t.
The second problem is even if we did all of that, it would not be enough according to the alarmists.
They want us to eat bugs, restrict driving, ban cows, force us to live in ecologically sustainable cities, and address income inequality. Sadly, that is not an exaggeration.
Meanwhile, please note that high priestess Kamala Harris has backed off fracking bans and tells us she will not take away your internal combustion union or gas stove.
Bickering Over the Wrong Things
Bickering over the percentage of manmadeness won’t solve anything.
So for the life of this post, I am 100% in agreement that climate change is 100% manmade. The bickering has ended.
Now please tell us how to fix the damn problem and get the US to go along.
After you explain that, and at what cost, please tell us how to get China, India, and the rest of the word to go along.
Meanwhile, might I propose we: Stop the incessant fearmongering, stop the know-it-all comeuppance on 100 percent manmadeness, and act on some of my “Reasonable Things We Could Do” list where there is general agreement.
When people are struggling to put food on the table, no one gives a damn about idiotic, constantly-repeated (and wrong) projections that the world will end in 10 years.
Last year, I commented Don’t Worry, It Will Only Cost $131 Trillion to Address Climate Change
It’s not a solution to say all we need is $130 trillion or whatever, unless you also explain where we get that $130 trillion, where and how we get the minerals, how much inflation that would add, and why it would be politically acceptable to the world, when the EU, China, and even Kamala Harris is backing off climate goals.
For those who disagree, please tell us how to fix the damn problem, get the US and entire world to go along, in a politically acceptable way, and at what cost, or shut up.