By Lena Babaeva
Selling the Green Economy for nothing? Tough sell. There have been a lot of claims about obtaining some environmental benefit at no cost, most recently as to global warming:
Few things are more appealing in politics than something for nothing. As Congress begins considering anti-global-warming legislation, environmentalists hold out precisely that tantalizing prospect: We can conquer global warming at virtually no cost. Here's a typical claim, from the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF):
"For about a dime a day [per person], we can solve climate change, invest in a clean energy future, and save billions in imported oil."
This sounds too good to be true, because it is. About four-fifths of the world's and America's energy comes from fossil fuels—oil, coal, natural gas—which are also the largest source of man-made carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas. The goal is to eliminate fossil fuels or suppress their CO2. The bill now being considered in the House would mandate a 42 percent decline in greenhouse emissions by 2030 from 2005 levels and an 83 percent drop by 2050.
The article highlights the issues with these, at times, very unrealistic goals that are based on unrealistic assumptions. Such assumptions as that economy will be at full employment, with strong growth, rise of fossil fuel prices, etc., that lead to the assumption that goals of curbing global warming could be achieved with virtually no cost. As with renewable energy, green jobs, and other new hot topics, global warming and other initiatives have to be reviewed in a more realistic light, with most of the assumptions tapered to the current conditions.
) above
Environmental
