By Benita M. Dodd
I have an issue with the first sentence of their paper:
“Global warming is a reality. But whether it is a serious problem — and whether emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases from human fossil fuel use are the principal cause — are uncertain. The current debate over the U.S. response to climate change centers on greenhouse gas emissions reduction policies, which are likely to impose substantially higher costs to society than global warming might.”
My issue is that I don’t believe that opening sentence goes far enough. I would have written, “Global warming is a reality. But so is global cooling. That’s why activists have renamed it ‘climate change.’”
In fact, the latest news is that there hasn’t been any global warming in 16 years. (Watch this funny and disturbing video of activists in denial!)
That said, the paper has some really great ideas. It’s a 17-page paper, but the summary of the proposals highlights some of the approaches the Georgia Public Policy Foundation has championed.
No. 1: Eliminate All Subsidies for Fuel Use. Subsidies for energy research and development, as well as the production, transportation, marketing and consumption of energy, encourage greater energy use and raise emissions levels.
No. 2: Reduce Regulatory Barriers to New Nuclear Power Plants. Regulatory delays add substantially to the cost of nuclear power, which is the only proven technology that can provide enough reliable emissions-free energy to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
No. 3: Reduce Wildfires through Alternative Forest Management Institutions. Local and private forest management would reduce overcrowding and disease in poorly managed national forests, increasing the ability of the trees to absorb carbon and reducing wildfires, which release huge amounts of CO2.
No. 4: Liberalize Approval of Biotechnology. Through biotechnology we are developing faster growing varieties of trees that can absorb and store large amounts of CO2 as well as drought-resistant crops that can thrive despite climate change.
No. 5: Repeal the National Flood Insurance Program. Subsidized flood insurance is responsible for much of the development in coastal areas and in flood plains. Eliminating this subsidy would make us less vulnerable to higher sea levels and increased rainfall.
No. 6: Increase Use of Toll Roads with Congestion Pricing. Toll lanes with rates that vary according to time of day can reduce traffic delays that increase energy use and emissions.
No. 7: Remove Older Cars from the Road. Subsidizing the replacement of older vehicles with newer ones would increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.
No. 8: Reform Air Traffic Control Systems. Allowing pilots to fly more direct routes and avoid lengthy holding patterns and runway delays would save fuel and reduce aircraft emissions.
No. 9: Remove Regulatory Barriers to Innovation. Environmental regulations often increase the costs of replacing older, dirtier facilities with newer, cleaner ones.
No. 10: Encourage Breakthroughs in New Technology. An “X” prize-type competition would encourage the development of new transportation and electric power technologies that reduce CO2 emissions while meeting future energy demands.
Among the policies the Foundation has actively supported are nuclear energy; reduced regulatory barriers; congestion pricing and toll roads; private and local management of forests.
But what I admire about these proposals is that they encourage the innovative and entrepreneurial spirit of Americans. They are common sense. They don’t rely on government to provide the solution.
And, oh, yes. No. 7. I especially like No. 7. It’s about time for a new car for me.
Read the proposals at http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/st321.pdf
I thank you for what you do. For 15 years you’ve been researching and writing on issues that matter. You take on tough questions, you apply innovative thinking, you push for action, and you do it all without regard to politics.