Enough with Global Warming!

I am a self-proclaimed tree-hugger.  I love policies that promote clean air and clean water and don’t mind paying higher taxes to have them.  I’m not, however, a blind follower of the Al Gore Global Warming movement, and I frankly don’t know how any intelligent environmentalist could be. 

First the facts.  Most reputable scientists agree that we are witnessing a global warming trend.  The math doesn’t lie.  Global mean temperatures have been increasing.  The trouble lies in the cause.  Most reputable scientists are hesitant to claim that humans are responsible for the climate change. In fact, most agree that it could be a century before we have enough evidence to determine whether or not this is simply a normal cyclical warming or a trend cause by human interference.  In addition, if humans are causing global warming, simply reducing carbon emissions would not be enough to reverse the trend.  We would also have to combat the massive deforestation taking place below the equator and the increasing emissions of developing nations, among many other factors.  Regardless, we won’t have any viable scientific answers during my lifetime, so why do politicians insist on having this argument?

There are far bigger issues at stake here.  First, the world will run out of oil eventually.  It is a non-renewable energy source.  The country that develops the best alternatives to oil will have an upper hand in global economics in the century ahead of us.  Why wouldn’t we want to be that country?

Second, respiratory diseases are repeatedly linked to the pollution we create through cars, industry, electricity, etc.  If you believe car exhaust is safe, please take a minute to suck on your tailpipe and see how you feel.  I can save you the trouble.  It isn’t good for you or anyone else.  Neither are any of the other pollutants we spill into the air every day.

If we’re going to argue that the government has an obligation to protect citizens’ rights to clean air, clean water, etc., then we should be arguing for policies that work and for debates that focus on the real issues not the possibility that we might find out fifty years from now that we contributed to global warming.

The continued focus on the ridiculous global warming debate diverts attention from real issues and makes cap and trade policies seem reasonable in the face of imminent danger.  The reality of cap and trade policies includes job losses and higher energy costs for the consumer.  Socially responsible businesses actively pursue cleaner energy and better environmental policies.  Cap and trade policies only make it more difficult for these companies to do business.  The socially irresponsible companies simply pick up and move their operations to parts of the world where less stringent regulations exist.  History has demonstrated this over and over again.  If the purpose of cap and trade is to reduce global pollution, how does driving industry out of the United States help?

Also, when companies are more heavily taxed, who ends up footing the bill?  No one really believes that companies are going to bear profit losses do they?  We all know that additional expenses will be passed on to us.  In an already weak economy, does it make sense to burden the consumer any more?  Does it make sense to drive out business? 

I don’t buy that our Congressmen and Congresswomen are stupid.  They didn’t get where they are by being stupid.  But as long as Americans are more focused on the death of Michael Jackson than the policies being debated and voted on by our legislators, Congress will continue to make policies in their own best interests rather than our best interests.  It’s time we demand real change focused on improving our environment for us and future generations, designed to put us at the forefront of alternative energy sales in the next century, and—most importantly—backed by responsible, reasonable, practical policies.

Advertisement