Biden climate change lies

[VITE1]

https://climaterealism.com/2022/08/k...-climate-bill/

On August 8th , just a day after the passage of the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act,” containing a suite of climate-related spending and tax credits, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) editorial board published a scathing editorial titled “Tilting at Climate Windmills – Schumer-Manchin will have little effect on the world’s temperature,” showing how the provisions of the bill will have virtually no effect on climate at all. WSJ uses analysis with the help of the IPCC climate models and Dr. Bjorn Lomborg to come up with a number, and the number is vanishingly small. They write:

Nearly all of Washington—Democrats, the press, lobbyists—is taking a victory lap with Senate passage of the Schumer-Manchin tax, climate and drug price control bill. The climate lobby is especially thrilled, claiming a historic victory that will reduce temperatures, hold back the rising sea, and save the planet.

Or, maybe not. Our contributor Bjorn Lomborg looked at the Rhodium Group estimate for CO2 emissions reductions from Schumer-Manchin policies. He then plugged them into the United Nations climate model to measure the impact on global temperature by 2100. He finds the bill will reduce the estimated global temperature rise at the end of this century by all of 0.028 degrees Fahrenheit in the optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, the temperature difference will be 0.0009 degrees Fahrenheit.

So, as seen in the figure below provided by Lomborg, we get somewhere between 0.028 and 0.0009°F reduction in temperature by 2100 for about 400 billion dollars in climate spending contained in the bill.



At that rate, simple math suggests the amount of money required to achieve the much desired 1.5°C (2.7°F) reduction in temperature (back to pre-industrial levels) using the best case reduction of 0.028°F would be $38,571,428,571,428 or approximately 39 Trillion dollars. The worst-case temperature reduction of 0.0009°F would cost a staggering 1,200,000,000,000,000 dollars or ONE QUADRILLION TWO HUNDRED TRILLION DOLLARS.

To put that number in perspective, according to the World Bank, the 2020 world economy in U.S. dollars was approximately $84.7 trillion. Assuming it would actually work, to have a meaningful effect on climate, the world would have to spend about half the global annual economy. If you think inflation is bad now, just wait for those sorts of numbers.

The worst-case scenario is out of reach of world wealth.

President Biden had this to say:

Now, let me be clear: This bill would be the most significant legislation in history to tackle the climate crisis and improve our energy security right away. And it’ll give us a tool to meet the climate goals that are set — that we’ve agreed to — by cutting emissions and accelerating clean energy.

Meanwhile, New York Times economist Paul Krugman suggested Democrats “saved civilization” with climate provisions in the spending bill. There are just no words to describe this sort of disconnect between believing you’re a climate superhero and climate reality, especially when you’re a Nobel winning economist. Kudos to WSJ for pointing out the climate folly of the “Inflation Reduction Act.”

[Aerovette]

Don't forget we have India and China offsetting any efforts to correct the climate.

[Onebadcad]

Originally Posted by aerovette

Don't forget we have India and China offsetting any efforts to correct the climate.

Add to the list russia, brazil and all other countries that are laughing at us.

[VITE1]

Originally Posted by aerovette

Don't forget we have India and China offsetting any efforts to correct the climate.

Correct. And if they moved to using cleaner burning American coal they could reduce some of their emissions.

[GTOguy]

Man's arrogance to think that he can change the planet's climate is ludicrous.
It is what it is. It was much warmer when the dinosaurs roamed. Then ice age. Then warm again and so on.
With China producing over 60% of the world's greenhouse gases, and India close to 30%, the less than 2% that we currently contribute dropping to 1% or less will make ZERO difference at a HUGE EXPENSE to our economy, health, and way of life. It's like being in a swimming pool with 500 people peeing in it and you're the only one not peeing and thinking it will make a difference. Not happening.

[ratflinger]

CO2 needs to be higher, there is no correlation between temp & CO2, but there is plenty of correlation between the amount of CO2 and the health of green plants, some who provide food. It doesn't take much research to prove that green weenies are so full of shit that they are the ones providing excess methane.

[Onebadcad]

Originally Posted by GTOguy

Man's arrogance to think that he can change the planet's climate is ludicrous.
It is what it is. It was much warmer when the dinosaurs roamed. Then ice age. Then warm again and so on.
With China producing over 60% of the world's greenhouse gases, and India close to 30%, the less than 2% that we currently contribute dropping to 1% or less will make ZERO difference at a HUGE EXPENSE to our economy, health, and way of life. It's like being in a swimming pool with 500 people peeing in it and you're the only one not peeing and thinking it will make a difference. Not happening.

I am one of those 500,,,