Cold Day in Hell Proves – There is No Climate Change.

February 2, 2016


In last week’s debate, Fox News asked a climate question. Somewhere in Hell, baby demons are freezing to death.

Dana Nuccitelli in The Guardian:

In the 2016 Republican presidential candidate debates, climate change has rarely been discussed. In last Thursday’s debate, the last before tonight’s Iowa caucus votes, on Fox News of all networks, there was one brief climate question directed at Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL). Unfortunately it was framed as a ‘gotcha, flip-flop’ question, with Rubio asked about his apparent support 8 years ago for a carbon cap and trade system in Florida, versus his current opposition to the concept. Rubio responded:

I have never supported cap and trade and I never thought it was a good idea. And I was clear about that at the time.

And I do not believe it’s a good idea now. I do not believe that we have to destroy our economy in order to protect our environment. And especially what these programs are asking us to pass that will do nothing to help the environment, but will be devastating for our economy.

When I am president of the United States of America, there will never be any cap-and-trade in the United States.

In another debate 4 months ago on CNN, Rubio made similar comments, adding:

America’s a lot of things, the greatest country in the world, but America is not a planet. And we are not even the largest carbon producer anymore, China is, and they are drilling a hole anywhere in the world that they can get ahold of.

Fact checking Marco Rubio

Politifact ruled it “mostly true” that Rubio never supported cap and trade. However, the rest of his comments are mostly false.

First, “blame China” is no longer a viable option. Despite having much lower cumulative historical carbon emissions than the USA, China has agreed to take serious action to curb its coal consumption and carbon pollution, and has announced that it will launch the world’s largest carbon cap and trade system. Using China to oppose an American carbon cap and trade system simply doesn’t make sense.

Second, the “our pollution is too small to matter” argument is known as the Tragedy of the Commons fallacy. If the USA can make that argument, then so can every country. If every country uses this excuse, then none cut their carbon pollution, and climate destabilization becomes inevitable. The good news is that the opposite is already happening. Virtually every country in the world agreed to cut carbon pollution as a result of the Paris climate negotiations, including the United States and China.

Third, there are already cap and trade systems in place in the United States. The George H.W. Bush administration invented the concept of cap and trade to tackle the problem of acid rain with an economically optimal, free market approach. Under that cap and trade system, emissions of the pollutants that were causing acid rain were cut more quickly and cheaply than expected, and the estimated economic benefits have outweighed the costs of the system 40-to-1.

California and a collaboration of nine northeastern states also already have successful carbon cap and trade systems in place. In order to comply with proposed EPA carbon regulations, many more states are likely to implement carbon cap and trade systems, or join these existing networks.

Fourth, as these successful existing cap and trade systems demonstrate, the concept hasn’t been devastating for the economy. Quite the opposite – the economies of the nine northeastern states, which implemented their regional cap and trade system in 2008, and of California, where it was introduced in 2013, have fared better than the national average. There is also a consensus among economic experts that we should cut carbon pollution, with most favoring a cap and trade system or carbon tax.

In fact, in a March 2007 speech, Rubio wisely argued that Florida should take advantage of the economic opportunities created by this type of free market solution.

This nation, and ultimately the world, is headed towards emission caps and energy diversification. Those changes will require technological advances that make those measures cost effective. The demand toward such advances will create an industry to meet it—Florida should become the Silicon Valley of that industry.

Fast forward to 2015.

Nuccitelli again:

Unfortunately there was no more debate about optimal climate policies last Thursday. Rubio rejected the possibility of a carbon cap and trade system, and the moderators moved on to another topic. However, the other Republican presidential candidates would likely have answered in a similar fashion. Governor Chris Christie pulled New Jersey out of the northeastern states carbon cap and trade system, Ted Cruz denies that the Earth is even warming, many of the candidates are science deniers, and the only Republican candidates who think we should take action to curb global warming (Lindsey Graham and George Pataki) have dropped out of the race.

Climate change has sadly turned into an ideological litmus test. Republican candidates fear that if they admit human-caused global warming is a problem that we need to solve, they won’t be able to win their party’s nomination. As Graham and Pataki’s candidacies showed, that may be true.

However, a growing number of Republican thought leaders and even a majority of Republican voters support a revenue-neutral carbon tax. The problem is that while they represent a majority of the party, the conservative right wing of the party that imposes ideological purity tests dominates the primary election voting. This may be a flaw in the American political system, since the Republican Party now stands alone as the only climate-denying major political party in the world, and a candidate who can pass the right wing ideological purity test is unlikely to win a nationwide general election.

It’s a problem that the Republican Party must solve, because we need them to participate in the climate policy debate. Their candidates’ current strategy of denying the consensus of climate science and economics experts just won’t cut it when the entire world is moving forward with efforts to solve the problem, taking advantage of the resulting economic opportunities that Rubio recognized eight years ago.


7 Responses to “Cold Day in Hell Proves – There is No Climate Change.”

  1. Tom Bates Says:

    The world may or may not be warming, It is probably warmer from all the political heat from the blogs, politicians, the commenters and the people who call themselves scientists in and out of government. One thing to keep in mind most of the information being bandied about is a distortion of the actual data which is some cases is either distorted or unreal. Never mind that past temperatures in studies have found the temperatures were warmer than today in the past 4000 years as well as colder like the little ice age. Those trees under a glacier in Alaska are an example of a warm period a 1000 years ago. The glacier extent is an example of the little ice age.

    Lets take a few examples of data. Barrow Alaska in October of 1911 was 7 degrees warmer than in October of 2015. Does that imply weather or climate change? Per many, anytime the place is warmer or colder or raining or snowing or sunny or anything, it is caused by climate change caused by man. The Giss data set is the gold standard for NOAA. Behind the scenes the gatekeepers in the Giss division are busy changing all the temperatures and plugging temperatures right and left, 66 percent are estimates. Does the fact more than half the data is unreal make the Giss data set suspect? Lets check some real world data. Antarctic sea and land ice is growing, colder? Greenland land ice is regrowing. Colder? Arctic ice is about the same as 1958 per the Danish. Maybe not melting away? The RSS and STAR data sets show either cooling or global no warming. Mixed or cooling?

    CO2 has increased, the increase solar gain has actually been measured, it is 0.00014705882 percent of solar gain. 2/10ths of a watt versus 1360 watt sq. meter. Johnston Atoll and Sydney ocean rise trends are under 3 inches in 100 years which implies not much of a temperature rise. Miami, a poster child for ocean rise is actually sinking from land subsidence as all those people pump out the ground water and divert the surface flows. Even the IPCC admits the data on storms increase is inconclusive and that Himalayan glaciers are stable so maybe, just maybe, a lot of hot air is man made after all and not the result of the increase in CO2.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Is this mish-mosh of Bates BS not the EXACT same comment he has made on other recent Crock threads? Aren’t some of the paragraphs at least exactly the same? As when ordering in a Chinese restaurant, “pick one from Column A, one from Column B”, except here it’s “pick one lie, distortion, or non-fact from page 269 of the Handbook of Bullshit for Moron Deniers, one from page133”, etc?

      Shouldn’t Tom the lazy Denier Moron be required to reword his denier BS from time to time? If he doesn’t, we should just reply with “booooooring….ZZZZZZzzzzz……!!!

    • uknowiss Says:

      You’re flogging a dead horse. It’s the same dead horse you’ve been flogging for years. It’s time to bury the old nag or drag its stinking carcass back to the cave and flog it some more with all your dead-horse flogging mates. Nobody here is really interested. One day, when you replace your poor old flogged to way past death nag with a nice shiny new fully electric vehicle and you’re ready to learn how to drive it, come back and have a chat.

    • greenman3610 Says:

      ” Arctic ice is about the same as 1958 per the Danish. ”

      given the quality of your citations, I have to assume you got this data from a breakfast pastry?

    • Tom Bates, where did you find the 2/10 watt number? A man of such strong opinions should identify himself. Are you the Berkeley, CA mayor?

  2. Marco was surely his third grade teacher’s pet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: