Mr. Obama goes to Copenhagen…
There’s a decent chance you may have viewed the below video from October. It features Lord Christopher Monckton from Great Britain who is a former advisor to Margaraet Thatcher in the 1980’s. In the video Monckton claims to have read the treaty that President Obama and the rest of the countries will sign at the United Nations Climate Summit in Copenhagen Denmark. Although I’m not big on conspiracy theories, and I do not believe Obama will be ceding our US Sovereignty anytime soon…(treaties call for 2/3 Senate approval anyway) the backdrop to this story is extremely important. As many are unaware this conference is even convening, its consequences for the future of our economy are dire and unbelievably far reaching
This week begins the much anticipated Copenhagen Climate Conference in Denmark. Leaders, delegates, officials, and journalists from 192 countries will embark on the 2 week summit to work towards a new protocol to replace the divisive Kyoto Protocol that expires in 2012. Although we are not officially abiding by the Kyoto Protocol, leaders from around the world are looking for us to lead the way in garnering promises to reduce carbon emissions from developed countries such as China and India and developing countries such as Somalia and North Korea. Also, developing countries have made it clear that they will not agree to any emissions reducing standards without substantial help from the US and other larger more prosperous nations. This is where the story gets real deep.
We must understand that the Climate Conference is based on a number of assumptions. 1) there is global warming, 2) it is manmade, 3) it will inevitably lead to catastrophe for the world if not addressed immediately, and 4) carbon dioxide is the culprit and must be capped. Although most rational folks can agree that the 20th century has witnessed changes in global climate patterns, many questions remain as to the root cause of the problem and to what degree we should willingly go to combat these changes, especially during a time of global recession.
President Obama and his administration, as well as much of the liberal demographic in our country and in the world believe the science is proven and that manmade carbon emissions are imminently responsible for global warming trends across the globe. Never mind the fact that these warming trends are up for dispute, or the fact that the key player in building evidence for the UN’s certitude regarding manmade global warming is currently being investigated, these players are pushing for tougher policies to curb carbon emissions, whether the agreement be binding or not.
President Obama has already pledged to reduce our domestic carbon emissions 17% by 2020 and a ridiculous 83% by 2050. Those promises would essentially take our carbon emissions per capita back to just after the Civil War. Talk about Hope. What have two of the worlds other largest CO2 emitters pledged? Well China has pledged to reduce their “carbon intensity” by 40-45%, and India has pledge 20-25% both by 2020. Carbon intensity means emissions per unit of production, so their overall footprint will undoubtedly rise in the future. What’s even more ridiculous is that Chinese officials have called our 17% pledge of reduction not good enough.
Furthermore, any new agreements or protocols enacted at the conference will cost us billions per year. UN officials are looking for a minimum agreement of $10 billion per year to help developing countries adapt to global warming effects and institute cleaner technologies. The European Commission said in September that the costs to support developing nations could reach a staggering $150 billion per year by 2020. Since the United States Gross Domestic Product is nearly the size of the entire European Union, you can imagine what the world community would believe our fair share is to contribute. At a very minimum I would estimate our share to be comparable to our portion of world GDP, or around 25%. This could mean somewhere in the ballpark of 2.5 to 35 billion per year to support developing nations deal with the unproven phenomenon of manmade global warming.
One might ask how President Obama can even be considering such agreements in today’s economic climate. Well, this is where the story actually gets worse. President Obama has long been a proponent of manmade global warming, and whole heartedly believes in the science behind it. So much that he said the science is proven and announced that he would push further for a Cap and Trade system to limit carbon emissions back on the campaign trail. (Please note that in 2007, Senate Republicans stopped the passage of the first Cap & Trade bill, named “America’s Climate Security Act of 2007.” Upon entering office, when most in the country still hadn’t even heard of Cap & Trade, Obama designated (December 2008) and the Senate confirmed (January 2009) Lisa Jackson to head up the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA. First on her agenda, lay the groundwork for officially vilifying CO2 and in the process provide the Administration political cover in pursuing its agenda, all the while nudging Congress to finally enact a monumental Cap & Trade bill.
Not three months passed (April 2009) from her Senate confirmation as EPA Administrator, and Lisa Jackson issued an “endangerment finding” on greenhouse gases which found Carbon Dioxide to be a direct threat to public health and wellbeing. Less than three months after this specious issuance, Nancy Pelosi, along with her compassionate, wide-eyed and imaginative cohorts passed H.R. 2454 – American Clean Energy and Security Act 2009. What’d included in that bill? A plan to regulate economy-wide carbon emissions by, you guessed it, 17% by 2020.
After the bill had already been passed in the House, it was revealed that the Cap & Trade power grab would cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars per year. Since costs would rise across the board for all products and services, some estimates said the legislation would cost families upwards of $2,000 per year. So much for not raising taxes on the middle class.
Now, reeking of perfect political timing and deserving of the utmost contempt possibly, the EPA predictably issued a finding that greenhouse gases, namely Carbon Dioxide, “threaten the public health and welfare of the American people.” Lisa Jackson, who announced the finding also added, “These long-overdue findings cement 2009’s place in history as the year when the United States government began addressing the challenge of greenhouse-gas pollution.”
This finding, geared to boost Obama’s momentum for the Copenhagen Conference could spell disaster for most major industries and nearly all consumers. In short, the cost of producing will go up, and those industries will be forced to either take hits on their margins, or pass those increased costs on to the consumer, it’s as simple as that. From the Associated Press on Monday, “The price could be steep for both industry and consumers. The EPA finding clears the way for rules that eventually could force the sale of more fuel-efficient vehicles and require plants to install costly new equipment — at a cost of billions or even tens of billions of dollars — or shift to other forms of energy.”
The Copenhagen Climate Conference does not hold many certainties. Will binding treaties be made, or will it be a feeble exercise of well-intentioned, enormously hypocritical folks, jet setting to a far off land in an attempt to save the world while emitting 41,000 tons of CO2 in the process? Will international praise in agreeing to lower carbon emissions be just what President Obama needs to turn the tide on his falling domestic support, or will his attempt to pledge money we don’t have for a crisis many don’t believe in on his way home from garnering an absurd Nobel Peace Prize won for potential finally awaken the American public to the incessant power grab that constitutes his administration? Will the main stream media finally do its job and look into the climategate scandal, or will the leftist’s agenda to exert more control over American’s choices and freedoms via carbon emissions standards come to fruition?
To be honest, the outlook for common sense to prevail in Copenhagen appears bleak. As Lisa Jackson put it during her historic Monday press conference when pressed on the validity and importance of the hacked English University of East Anglia she said, “The vast body of evidence not only remains unassailable, it has grown even stronger.” So she thinks that the clear evidence of scientists with political agendas, scientists who knowingly suppressed data, fixed peer reviews, squashed dissent, and destroyed damning raw data, makes her case even stronger? We truly are living in an upside down world. A world that can bring leaders from every country on earth together not to fight against disease, not to fight against totalitarian regimes, or genocide, or third-world poverty, but to fight against the very air we breathe. Carbon Dioxide. I suppose elections really do have consequences…