Monday, September 18, 2017

So why are we in this Paris Climate deal?

Harvey and Irma Can't be Blamed on Climate Change

There's only one small problem with such accusations. Man-made warming did not cause Harvey and Irma. As carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions have increased, there have been no trends in global tropical cycle landfalls. Before Harvey and Irma, with a little bit of luck, the United States was in a 12-year hurricane drought. More importantly, the average number of hurricanes per decade reaching landfall in the U.S. has fallen over the past 160 years. This comes not via "denier data," but from mainstream science. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported in its most recent scientific assessment that "(n)o robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes, and major hurricanes ... have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin," and that there are "no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency." 

 Take note even the latest IPCC assessment said there's no correlation between global warming and tropical cyclonic activity.

Even if man-made warming were responsible for Harvey and Irma, the policies that tax or regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions are costly non-solutions. The U.S. could slap a $40 tax on all carbon dioxide emissions, and the "climate benefits" would be hardly noticeable. By the year 2100, the averted warming would be less than two-tenths of a degree Celsius, and the averted sea level rise would be less than 2 centimeters. The costs, however, would be staggering. Because carbon dioxide-emitting conventional fuels meet 80 percent of America's energy needs, the tax would harm families multiple times over as energy is a necessary component for almost everything we make and do. Between now and 2035, the country would experience an average employment shortfall of 400,000 lost jobs, a total loss of income exceeding $20,000 for a family of four, and a $2.5 trillion hit to the overall economy. That means less wealth to combat future challenges, whether they are climate-related or not. 

The disaster is not global warming per sec. It is the misbegotten policies to try and prevent it. It is surly a case where the cure is worse than the disease.

No comments: