• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Regulating CO2 with Common Sense is a Contradiction in Terms

    Of the many alarming comments Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Lisa Jackson made to attendees at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, a select few stood out as particularly daunting. On the anniversary of Pearl Harbor, the EPA dropped its own economic bomb, asserting that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases are dangerous pollutants and a threat to human health and the environment. Consequently, the EPA is preparing to implement costly regulations on the economy to cut carbon dioxide emissions. But Jackson said we can take common sense without sacrificing our economy. Specifically she said,

    “It will ensure that we take meaningful, common-sense steps, and allow us to do what our Clean Air Act does best – reduce emissions for better health, drive technology innovation for a better economy, and protect the environment for a better future – all without placing an undue burden on the businesses that make up the better part of our economy.”

    A common sense way to regulate carbon dioxide without cost is impossible. The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis study of the economic effects of carbon dioxide regulations found cumulative gross domestic product (GDP) losses of $7 trillion by 2029 single-year GDP losses exceeding $600 billion in some years, energy cost increases of 30 percent or more, and annual job losses exceeding 800,000 for several years. But Jackson didn’t stop there. She also asserted that regulations should not replace cap and trade legislation but instead complement it:

    “This is not an either/or moment. This is a both/and moment.”

    Not only is this redundant but it also gives lawmakers and unelected bureaucrats authority to pile on rules and regulations that would chokehold the economy. The House of Representatives already passed their 1,428 pages of legislation that includes not only a cap and trade scheme but also a host of other burdensome provisions. Meanhile, the EPA drafted 564 pages of regulations in its Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Surely some will overlap but you can be sure that where one misses, the other hits the economy, and hits hard. According to FoxNews, one White House official said of the way EPA will regulate: “[I]t is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it’s going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty.”

    Whether it’s disguised as clean jobs legislation or pollution reduction regulation, the reality is any cap and carbon dioxide is an energy tax – an attempt to drive energy prices so high that people use less. Because we use a lot of fossil fuel-based energy and there’s no low cost alternative, there’s no way around the economic pain that will ensue.

    Jackson then proceeded to talk about the science behind global warming, taking a backdoor shot at Climategate:

    “Now, we know that skeptics have and will continue to try and sow doubts about the science of climate change. These are the same tactics that have been used by defenders of the status quo for years. Those tactics only serve to delay and distract from the real work ahead, namely, growing our clean energy economy and finding innovative, cost-effective ways to reduce harmful GHGs. It’s time that we let the science speak for itself. We have relied on decades of sound, peer-reviewed, extensively evaluated scientific data. That data came from around the world and from our own U.S. scientists. What is makes clear beyond doubt is that climate change is real, and that now is the time to act.”

    She’s right about two things. We should let the science speak for itself and climate change is real. Climate change has always been real but it shouldn’t be confused with manmade global warming, or even global warming in general, that’s purportedly destroying our planet. With the emergence of Climategate, now more than ever is the time we should allow for transparent science. Now isn’t the time to rush things through for baseless reasons like “We’ve waited long enough.” We should allow the truth of the science to play out. The skeptics who are allegedly employing method of delay and distract are in reality seeking truth and validity. That’s not such a bad thing for legislation and regulation that comes with such a hefty price tag.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    15 Responses to Regulating CO2 with Common Sense is a Contradiction in Terms

    1. Paul Agostino Wilmi says:

      the congress of the united states and senate if they together give up our sovernity should be tried for treason because they have ignored the citizens demands , they are supposed to represent us, not fill their pockets at our expense

    2. Bobbie Jay says:

      -”all without placing an UNDUE burden on the businesses that make up the better part of our economy”? what government discreetly deems ARE businesses DUES, are all of the burdens this will cause!

      The people deserve and demand a right to sound, impartial evidence. TREASON TO IMPLEMENT APPROPRIATIONS THAT ARE UNAPPROPRIATED IN DIRECT OPPOSITION: of the facts, independent science, visual observation and health, evident of the people.

      What are the specific names of these “businesses that make up the better part of our economy”? Are they freely operating? Or are they tax payer, government operating>

      they won’t tolerate or accept the truth and are depriving the world of it. Look how she spins the words she read from conservatives. They can’t speak for themselves. Their minds are narrow and focused on destruction in all areas this country built for all mankind, willed to live with equality of one human race, willed to live free as an individual, free thinking, independent and under civil laws, without exception of human race.

    3. Charles, The Republi says:

      An "Air Tax", go figure. The Lunatic Fringe has found away to tax exhalation. Will the EPA be installing monitors on everyone so they can measure your CO2 output?

    4. ron villella, florid says:

      To those in Congress who say they object to the ridiculous

      Climate arguments and EPA actions, where are you and what are

      you doing about it?

      Charles Krauthammer suggests a one page bill that deletes CO2

      from the previous legislation or that redefines pollutants as

      excluding CO2 and water vapor. How anyone can define CO2 and

      water vapor which are generated within man is patently ridiculous

      to most thinking, halfway educated people. It most probably

      is part of the elites strategy to control populations.

    5. JoAnne Colorado says:

      Why can't the Congress just defund the EPA?

      Are all the crocked politicians acting like their hands are tied?

    6. John Roane Sarasota says:

      Does this mean that as a result of treating my Viet Nam service connected disabilities the EPA will put a tax or penalty on my intestinal gases? If so I will expect being service connect the DVA will increase my monthly disability check to offset the tax. Or will this be just another way to reduce the burden we American Veterans put on the country, after all what did we do or sacrifice that deserves our government making good on the promise to help heal us after the war. De Oppresso libre,

    7. CARL Overtaxed Calif says:

      Treason, yes, it is reasonable way to send congress a wake up call … Obey the Constitution … the Will of the People … or face real Treason charges for giving up US sovernty (sp)for personal gain … good way to fire the liberal congress … and maybe put the economy thieves in jail

    8. Tim Az says:

      These people are geniuses. If Cap&Trade is not successful at collapsing the free market system. Just call in the EPA to finish the job. What an excellent fail safe. Looks like socialism followed by communism is coming to a continent near you.

      Another helping of hope and change anyone?

    9. philip says:

      Treason by our goverment from the presdent to the house and congress. Congress can control the epa by stoping funds or changing regulation with passage of law they are just back at the scare tatics and smoke and mirrors to fool people

    10. Bill Lee, ArkLaTex a says:

      I am worried that this measure has the potential to cause major violence in the streets of America. When people do not have jobs, food, or electricty or fuel for their cars we will have major riots.

      This will allow Obama to declare Marshall Law!! We may have had our last Presidental election!

    11. Jill, California says:

      The EPA may be on to something.

      The EPA has declared carbon dioxide to be a dangerous pollutant that threatens life and the environment. Humans exhale carbon dioxide. Members of congress emit so much hot air that they alone are responsible for a significant portion of any global warming … assuming it's not all a hoax. If we could shut members of congress up and keep them from emitting hot air, we'd solve the "crisis."

    12. Terry Dolven- Arizon says:

      With Obama's administration and the Democratic Congress in control, it seems almost futile to make them see the huge mistakes they are making on cap & trade and all the other spending. Will common sense prevail or are we headed for a complete failure of our system? We need to keep up the pressure by calling our representatives and senators.

    13. Tim Az says:

      If Mao-Bama were to declare martial law he would be declaring war against the American citizenry. The outcome would not be in his favor. Lets hope his survival instincts outway his megalomania.

      More abscence of hope and change anyone?

    14. JT New York says:

      How can the EPA declare CO2 as a pollutant when we need a certain level of it in our blood to keep are PH levels in our blood. The norm is between 7.35 to 7.45. When people hyperventilate it drops the CO2 levels in are blood causing respiratory alkalosis. This increases the amount of bound calcium, producing relative hypocalcemia resulting in carpopedal spasms (cramping of the muscles of the feet and hands.

    15. Tamas Havas, Budapes says:

      Dear All

      I am a very old metallurgical engineer dealing with heattechnick and skilled in thermodynamics. I know that a very simple aim to battle against the CO2 for stop the environmental catastrophe. It seems, that the politians went mad.

      The earth as being a semi closed system is not writable down some incorrect formula.

      These statements are incoherent. Everyone said its own right in the Climate Conference, but nothing happened.

      The most dangerous thing is the human activity. It must be changed. Before identifying the role of the CO2, the mankind will go in wrong direction. The only solution is a scientific measurement in correct equipment and disclosed the political control

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×