Saturday, January 26, 2013

On Climate Change, Some Arguments Shift -
Only 28% of respondents 65 and over thought there was solid evidence the earth was warming because of human activity, versus 42% overall.
[Kelsie Wendelberger] said that from a cost-benefit standpoint, it pays to address climate change. "Look at the numbers," she said. "It would have been better not to have to spend so much on recovery" after superstorm Sandy and other recent events.  [Hey Kelsie:  Can I see the numbers in question?  How much, specifically, would it have cost to prevent Sandy?]
European cap-and-trade market takes a nose dive | The Daily Caller
“The market is panicking, really,” Daniel Rossetto, managing director of Climate Mundial, told Bloomberg, adding that traders fear that Europe’s carbon emissions market won’t continue past 2020.
Told You So: Red Faces As Green Deal Flops | The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)
Expect red faces in Whitehall next week about the flop of Green Deal, the Coalition Government’s latest big idea to recycle taxpayers’ money in a bid to improve energy efficiency and save the planet.
Don't Cry For The Failure Of Cap And Trade, You Wouldn't Have Liked How It Turned Out
Carbon trading, in other words, is an invitation for all sorts of behind-the-scenes chicanery that Congress already excels at. If the Obama’s plan had been enacted, it would surely have led to yet more special pleading (if that’s possible). And the likely headlines of the last four years wouldn’t have been about waning carbon intensity, but more complaints about giveaways to big business. Cap and trade would have made boondoggles like Solyndra look insignificant.

No comments: