• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Obama’s Attempt to Revive Cap and Trade

    President Obama gave his first State of the Union speech last night and while his delivery reminded many Americans of the man they saw on the campaign trail, his rhetoric was much of the same. Although the president did call for offshore drilling and an expansion of nuclear, his focus was clean energy jobs. He declared,

    But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. That means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country. It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies. And yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.

    I am grateful to the House for passing such a bill last year. This year, I am eager to help advance the bipartisan effort in the Senate. I know there have been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy; and I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. But even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future – because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy. And America must be that nation.”

    A climate bill with incentives that will make clean energy profitable really means a carbon tax on cheaper, more reliable fuels with a cap and trade system. Of course, the President Obama can’t say that. Incentives in this case also means tax credits, subsidies, mandates and loan guarantees for preferred energy sources. To be clear, no energy source should receive such support, subsidizing inefficient energy sources costs Americans as energy consumers in terms of higher prices and as taxpayers.

    The president said there were those disagreeing with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. While it was clear from the grumblings from some sections in the Capitol that certain Members of Congress disagree, so do scientists and climatologists. The government relies heavily on the 2007 United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report to establish consensus, but more than 700 scientists dispute the findings of that report. And a new study is showing that the amplification of global warming by carbon-cycle feedback is much less than previously though. Another study finds that “the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150 years or during the most recent five decades.”

    Now, it’s turning out that some of the claims in the IPCC report may not be accurate. The Himalayan glaciers won’t disappear by 2035 as it was said in the report; and that claim was based on speculation. Digging deeper, the IPCC climate models were based on data from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at East Anglia University. Hackers leaked e-mails and other documents CRU’s scientists and the emails detail how these climatologists refused to share data, plotted to keep dissenting scientists from getting published in leading journals and discarded original data. Some have resigned. Others are under investigation. It turns out that the actions of CRU scientists breached data laws under the Freedom of Information Act.  The president brought the swagger he had during his campaign trail back to the podium last night, but his insistence on transparency was nowhere to be found.

    And President Obama says we must be the best in clean energy production. Why? What if it’s cheaper to import it? His confidence in American innovation and entrepreneurial spirit is laudable but his mercantilist approach (he also said he wants to double exports in 5 years) to job creation will be a road to inefficiency and less prosperity.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    11 Responses to Obama’s Attempt to Revive Cap and Trade

    1. Dougetit says:

      "overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change"

      Got a kick out of this as well as Congress did when he metioned it.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99DMZiA2ybA

    2. Bobbie Jay says:

      I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change.

      What evidence, Mr. President? First it's global warming, now and all of a sudden, it's "overwhelming evidence on CLIMATE CHANGE"? climate change is WEATHER, Mr. intelligence. Every state in this country and all around the world experiences climate change everyday.

    3. Rich Stewart, Carlis says:

      A. We do not need a climate bill to build nuclear power plants in the U.S. We need the Federal Government and the environmental fringe groups to get out of the way and quit drive up the cost of new construction and delaying the process required to approve new construction.

      B. We already have safe nuclear power plants. The only thing that I can think of that would lead to unsafe nuclear power plants would be more government regulations which invariably are fraught with unintended and in most cases undesirable consequences. Speaking as a former U.S. Navy electrician who has actually made electrical power and later having served as an Naval officer on a FBM submarine I suspect I know more about generating electricity and how safe a nuclear power plant can be than the entire collection of czars and other "advisers" in the Obama administration.

      C. Biofuels such as ethanol are a waste of energy (a net loss energy by the time it finally gets to market) and a scam. We have the best agricultural production capability in the world. Productive soil would be better put to use for food production to feed the world (increase exports) rather than drive up the price of food worldwide by wasting corn on the biofuel scam.

      D. Anyone other than the CRU/Penn State/NASA/NOAA cabal, the UN One World gang, and helpless Kool-Aid drinkers knows that man's contribution to climate change doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

      I could go on but I wouldn't want to violate your brevity standard (although I'm not real clear on what constitutes a violation of your brevity standard).

    4. Dave O, VA says:

      Last sentence, first paragraph of President's quote above…"And yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America."

      In other words, we'll make current energy sources so expensive, even the very expensive clean energies will look cheap by comparison. Gotta love our leader's logic and business savvy.

    5. Lloyd Scallan - New says:

      Obama's statement to Dianne Sawyer is an admission that he knows he is a

      one term president. His agenda is in trouble so he is "doubling down". There is not a single aspect that he will not lie about or distort the true facts. Crap and Tax

      is just one. He knows full well that this is the last chance the socialist will have

      to "transform" this country. This is the culmination of their 100 year plan. He, and his ilk, will not stop. We all must realize they are now desperate and will say or do everything they must to complete their plan.

    6. Moose says:

      Global warming legislation will do more damage to the U.S.A. economy then ObamaCare. The idea of Cap & Tax is a bigger threat to our sovereignty then radical Islam.

    7. Don Harper, Lubbock, says:

      I fully expect the Dems to push Cap&Trade and immigration reform just as hard, and just as unethically, as they are doing healthcare reform. Of the three, I wouldn't be surprised if immigration is next, because they can see Americans aren't falling for their BS. Time to expand the pool of pliant, voters grateful to and dependent upon government.

    8. Pingback: Solar and Wind Powered Portable Charger Unveiled at CES 2009 | AboutSolarPower.info

    9. Sanford Olnhausen says:

      The President must pass "overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change" but he will not furnish evidence of his own birth certificate!

    10. john gibson, houston says:

      JOE WILSON IS RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    11. AZ_VET says:

      Where does mr. soon to be unemployed president get his information?. It seems that the global warming scam perpetrated by the useless nations, noaa, and others has been exposed as a fraud. Can he not read? What are his advisers and speech writers doing? Could it be that the "man" can't think or speak without a teleprompter.

      Good grief, the man is alleged to have been a college professor teaching Constitutional Law and a Harvard law graduate. Even as a student did he not have to speak in front of the class in defense of his assignmente. One wonders if he wasn't awarded his degree just cause he said, "present", as he did in the US senate.

    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.

    ×