Imagine a nation, full of responsible people, refusing to burden future generations with the problems of the current nation.
And what if that burden was climate change?
The howls of climate skeptics can be heard from over yonder and 6 feet under.
What they might not realize or are otherwise willing to ignore, is that a prominent UC Berkeley scientist and global warming skeptic Richard Muller, sifted through the existing data and changed his mind about global warming.
Look, it's not going to cost the $1.3 trillion that the Iraq War has cost American taxpayers between 2001 and 2008 -- something that is already burdening future generations, right?
And anyway, let's say that in 2030, it turns out climate change has altered the Earth's landscape. Now you're burdened with two costs: the cost of damages from climate change and the cost of adaption / reversing climate change. Because reversing climate change takes decades, regardless of whether it is 2012 or 2030, the costs will always carry over to future generations, as well as the effects of change.
Let me put this into perspective. The EPA reports that in 2010 America released 6.8 billion metric tons of GHG. The report states that two-thirds of all GHG emissions comes from transportation and electricity generation. That means that a large chunk of GHG reduction could be accomplished by one-time changes, from multi-billion dollar investments in clean electricity generation and ultra-low emissions vehicles -- the easy stuff.
Investing in these two areas in fact do not burden the future. By nudging people into higher-efficiency, cleaner vehicles today, the entire auto industry is nudged towards higher-efficiency, cleaner vehicle production today, for the benefit of cheaper materials and methods in the future. By nudging people and industries into cleaner energy production, future generations benefit from cheaper energy. More importantly, our relationship with the Middle East and OPEC changes drastically, cutting down our own spending on wars in the future.
So why not invest into a better tomorrow?
1 comment:
Nudging the public to gradually adopt clean technologies sounds like a great plan to me. But the approach the greenies have taken over the last several years is not 'nudging'. Using the threat of carbon controls, making everyone into carbon traders though cap&Trade, wind turbines being jammed down our throats, global governance, these are not nudges.
You want to nudge me? Nudge away. You want to force me by law to ruin my great life here in N America by tricking me with fears of climate catastrophe, I'm pushing right back, you'll get nowhere. Nudging will work though.
Post a Comment