The Free Press, Mankato, MN

Your View

February 17, 2014

In defense of carbon dioxide

Way back in 2008 presidential candidate Barack Obama promised policies that would bankrupt anyone who wanted to produce electricity from coal. The scheme continues — without Congress. On Nov. 1, 2013 President Obama issued an Executive Order: “Preparing the United States for the Impact of Climate Change.”

Certainly we need to continue to explore cost effective alternative sources of energy. But meanwhile let’s not overreact with a premature war on carbon dioxide emissions from coal. It has been suggested that 89 percent of coal-fired plants operating now will be forced off-line in less than one year by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations. Coal fired plants produce about 40 percent of the country’s electricity. Coal is the main source of energy for 21 states.

On February 24 the United States Supreme Court will hear Chamber of Commerce v. EPA and consider whether the Environmental Protection Agency has gone too far in expanding existing regulations controlling CO2 emissions from motor vehicles, to include stationary sources. There are other associated cases pending. Decisions are expected in June.

Subsequent to President Obama’s executive order, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said: “I really see no greater issue and no more urgent threat to public health than climate change. Climate change is not just a public health and safety issue...I consider it to be one of the greatest economic issues of our of the concerns I have is resources continue to be challenged...”.

According to the Science and Environmental Policy Project the United States has spent over $165 billion on climate change. The Office of the Inspector General reported that “program data can not be consistently relied upon by decision makers”, and it can not be ensured “that federal funds were being spent in an appropriate manner.”

Moreover, when reporting on some of that spending John Hinderaker said: “...Nearly $2.5 billion went to fund the alarmist campaign; no wonder alarmist scientists don’t want the gravy train to end. The symbiosis is obvious; the government pays alarmists billions to spread myths about climate, and the point of the mythology is to persuade voters to confer more power on government...Lots of money to allies of big government; that’s what global warming alarmism is all about.”

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Your View