Cap And Trade: The New Health Care?
Published on: January 25, 2010
show comments
  • T. Luxe

    Good article. Balanced and sensible. In the past year, I changed from a die hard (ignorant) AGW believer to a die hard AGW denier. I have read over 150 articles and papers on Global Warming. In addition, I have done my own research. I now believe that CO2 at only .0387% of the atmosphere, even if doubled, would have virtually no impact on the earth’s climate. And furthermore, I believe that doubling CO2 could actually help mankind grow a lot more food. As can be seen at the following URL, I am not alone in this belief..

    http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p1845.htm

    On one point, I did my own research. This can be easily duplicated. I simply went to the US EIA site and downloaded information on global CO2 production. The EIA provides both historic data and forecasts though 2030. The historic data can be used to cross reference how many giga tonnes of CO2 resulted in how much atmospheric CO2 increase for rolling 10 year periods of time. This data makes it clear that 1 G-Ton of CO2 over rolling 10 year periods of time resulted in on average increases atmospheric CO2 by .0775 ppm. If the USA reduces CO2 by 42% from 2010 levels by 2030, the cumulative reduction would be 30.1 G Tonnes. That would impact atmospheric CO2 concentration by only 2.4 PPM (+ or – .13 ppm). So with Cap and Trade by 2030 atmospheric CO2 would around 443 ppm, and without Cap and Trade in the US CO2 production would be 445.4 ppm. What does 2.4 ppm mean temperature wise? Something far less than .01 deg C. What’s really frightening here is that we have a congress that is apparently stupid enough to think this makes sense!

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.