Green Hubris and the weekly Chilling Effect cartoon

Energy and Environment: Around The Interwebs

· Watts Up With That?: Global cooling – hail to the chief!

· Climate Audit: The US Synthesis Report and the Search for Climate WMD

· The Beauty of Drilling

· Why unions are supporting the green movement: “A Move to Put the Union Label on Solar Power Plants” …

· … and why Deutsche Bank is helping out the alarmists

· WSJ’s Environmental Capital blog: “The Senate’s “cash for clunkers” bill was initially meant to help the environment and automakers. It might do little for either—for now.”

· “Energy Cap and Trade Threatens American Prosperity”

· W.Va. energy industry under attack

Public Opinion, Global Warming, and Cap and Trade Legislation

“…for most voters, global warming is not significant enough on its own to drive support for major energy reform.” — That’s the advice to Democrats considering cap-and-trade legislation, and it’s an important lesson for both sides of the debate.

Take a look at the public’s perception of global warming, energy, and environmental policies. It’s clear that Americans want a clean environment but they aren’t going to throw away the economy just to get a little greener. So politicians — typically Democrats but politicians of all sorts — who have hoped to pass climate legislation are being forced to rethink their strategy.

What will the new term be for those dedicated to controlling us and rationing energy? It appears enviros want to “get America running on clean energy.” That’s a change from pushing a supposedly “market-based” cap-and-trade regime — which, in turn, was favored over a carbon TAX because it didn’t force politicians to admit they support a massive new national energy tax).

But no matter what spin a politician puts on it, rationing energy is bad for our economy, bad for jobs, bad for consumers (who will see higher costs and lose those aforementioned jobs) — all for arguably little or no benefit. So it is indeed a dedicated environmentalist or politician who scoffs at public opinion.

Green Hubris, Global Warming, and President Obama

The folks over at OpposingViews.com, a growing opinion repository on the web, were kind enough to take some thoughts from us on green jobs, global warming, and cap and trade.

Global Warming: Jobs Creator or Killer?

Many advocates of global warming legislation suggest that its economic consequences won’t be too bad or that it might even be a boon for business and jobs. Of course, that’s economic hogwash. The government doesn’t pick winning and losing industries without the rest of the economy’s efficiency becoming the real loser.





	June 22, 2009 Energy and Environment: Around The Interwebs · Watts Up With That?: Global cooling – hail to the chief! · Climate Audit: The US Synthesis Report and the Search for Climate WMD · The Beauty of Drilling · Why unions are supporting the green movement: “A Move to Put the Union Label on Solar Power Plants” … · … and why Deutsche Bank is helping out the alarmists · WSJ’s Environmental Capital blog: “The Senate’s “cash for clunkers” bill was initially meant to help the environment and automakers. It might do little for either—for now.” · “Energy Cap and Trade Threatens American Prosperity” · W.Va. energy industry under attack Public Opinion, Global Warming, and Cap and Trade Legislation “…for most voters, global warming is not significant enough on its own to drive support for major energy reform.” — That’s the advice to Democrats considering cap-and-trade legislation, and it’s an important lesson for both sides of the debate. Take a look at the public’s perception of global warming, energy, and environmental policies. It’s clear that Americans want a clean environment but they aren’t going to throw away the economy just to get a little greener. So politicians — typically Democrats but politicians of all sorts — who have hoped to pass climate legislation are being forced to rethink their strategy. What will the new term be for those dedicated to controlling us and rationing energy? It appears enviros want to “get America running on clean energy.” That’s a change from pushing a supposedly “market-based” cap-and-trade regime — which, in turn, was favored over a carbon TAX because it didn’t force politicians to admit they support a massive new national energy tax). But no matter what spin a politician puts on it, rationing energy is bad for our economy, bad for jobs, bad for consumers (who will see higher costs and lose those aforementioned jobs) — all for arguably little or no benefit. So it is indeed a dedicated environmentalist or politician who scoffs at public opinion. Green Hubris, Global Warming, and President Obama The folks over at OpposingViews.com, a growing opinion repository on the web, were kind enough to take some thoughts from us on green jobs, global warming, and cap and trade. Global Warming: Jobs Creator or Killer? Many advocates of global warming legislation suggest that its economic consequences won’t be too bad or that it might even be a boon for business and jobs. Of course, that’s economic hogwash. The government doesn’t pick winning and losing industries without the rest of the economy’s efficiency becoming the real loser.