P/cloudy
63°
P/cloudy
Hi 76° | Lo 50°

Letter: The price of inaction

Katy Burns’s “What’s in it for the average climate change skeptic?” does an excellent job of presenting how “unhinged” climate denier beliefs are (Sunday Monitor, May 18).

It’s time the silent majority spoke up and let Congress know we want them to do something about climate change. The IPCC’s latest reports say we must reduce carbon emissions by 40 to 70 percent in the next 15 years or we’ll risk “catastrophic” climate change, meaning runaway global warming leading to “societal collapse” and eventually we’ll be Venus.

A revenue-neutral carbon tax will cost us nothing and save us trillions. A carbon pollution tax paid by fossil fuel corporations to us, the consumers, not the government would help, not hurt our economy. When fossil fuels cost more than renewables, people naturally will switch, using their tax money. Most people are projected to profit or at least break even.

As they scale up, solar and wind energy will cost less than fossil fuels do now. Imports from countries like China will be taxed according to their CO2 emissions, so it encourages them to go green and us to buy American, using our tax money.

Eight Nobel economists support this plan. It’s market-driven and requires no government regulations. See the Citizens Climate Lobby website for details.

Climate change has already cost American taxpayers over a trillion dollars (NOAA website). We can cut our losses by phasing out fossil fuels ASAP. The IEA says five more years of inaction on climate will cost about $5 trillion more.

LYNN GOLDFARB

Lancaster

The IPCC guy who resigned was not the lead author, only dissenter out of hundreds of climate scientists who supported it. Anyone who knows the IPCC report process knows it's watered down by countries who do not want the worst news to come out. The IPCC reports are optimistic compared to the harder truths in the peer-reviewed literature.

how much wind and solar will it take just to power NH?? and...can just wind and solar work..no need for other forms of producing power? and the most baffling part...how are we manufacturing all this new technology..as in..where is the power coming from necessary to produce all this wonderful stuff?

A study done last year at the University of California proves that either solar or wind power could easily meet the world's energy needs several times over. And their prices are becoming competitive, and falling 15% each year. They soon be cheaper than fossil fuels and without the fossil,fuel ";;externalities" of climate change, water, land and air pollution. Their storage/intermittency problems have been solved. Read The Third Industrial Revolution by Jeremy Rifkin's to see where it's already re-invigorating the economies of U.S. Cities and other countries.

hogwash - what then liberal means is it will become competitive only when it is massively subsidized by Nobama bucks from the bankrupt federal govt

The preceding was an unpaid public service announcement by a member of Citizens Climate Lobby. The opinions are also held by the editors, Katy Burns and many progressives posters here on the Forum. However, that does not mean that they are not dupes, pawns, being used by progressive politicians.

Yup, all those climate scientists - you know, the 97% of them - are "dupes, pawns, being used by progressive politicians."

If one believes the 97% hogwash they also believe in the tooth fairy

You remind me of that propaganda guy in Iraq who kept insisting the Americans hadn't invaded while the town was surrounded. You are funny.

Actually, anyone who buys the Koch Brother's billion-dollar climate denial campaign is being duped. Modeled directly on tobacco's denial that smoking causes lung cancer. ( Scientific American). Do some research.

Well, ya get around Lynn. A cursory Google Search shows that you have written 7 other similar opinion pieces over the past 60 days to several news sources. Good persistence! Bad message.

Alarmists follow their religion like lemmings off a cliff

The leaders of those who are fighting climate change are the top climate change scientists in the world, thousands of them, and Nobel Prize-winners among them. The leaders of those who oppose climate change action are GOP politicans whose campaigns are funded by the fossil industry and those who listen to the right-wing think tanks like. Heartland the fossil fuel billionaires, the Koch Brothers, fund. ( Scientific American).

dude your alarmist religion has been totally discredited - a HOAX - time to find a new hobby

You and the other deniers on here are the one with the "religion", since your claims have nothing in the way of substance to back them up.

how about no statistical global warming different from ZERO for 17 years 9 months - that comes from Alarmists Pope Hanson Himself

The lead author of the IPCC last 3 assessments has resigned in disgust with the

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.