CLIMATE CHANGE' FIGHT HAS
COST YOU MORE THAN $166 BILLION, New
report shows bill comparable to entire Apollo moon-mission program, by Joe
Wilson, 6/10/17, WND
WASHINGTON – The U.S. government
spent nearly as much fighting “climate change” between 1993 and 2014 as was
spent on the entire Apollo program between 1962 and 1973, according to a new
report.
A May 2017 report from the Capital
Research Center (CRS) states that “from FY 1993 to FY 2014 total U.S.
expenditures on climate change amount to more than $166 billion.” The total includes more than $26.1
billion from President Obama’s 2009 stimulus
bill, as well as regular annual budget amounts and federal tax credits
distributed over a period of 21 years.
In comparison, the U.S. spent $200
billion, adjusted for inflation, on the Apollo space program, which ran from
1962 until 1973 and flew 17 missions, including Apollo 11, which put a man on
the moon for the first time. Through the program, the U.S. sent seven men to
the moon and back.
The CRS report comes just as
President Trump has announced that the U.S. is withdrawing from the Paris
climate accord. Under the agreement, the U.S. would have been obligated to
pay $3 billion to a green fund by 2020, among other expected contributions.
The report shows that annual
expenditures on climate change have increased 490 percent since 1993, and the
annual amount going through the U.N. for combating climate change
internationally has climbed by 440 percent.
Most of the money is not going to
climate-science research but to control CO2 emissions based on inadequately
tested hypotheses dating to the 1970s. The amount of money spent on further
research and experimentation in climate science is $42.49 billion, according to
the report. It’s little more than 25 percent of total expenditure on climate
change, meaning that 75 percent of the U.S. climate-change budget is dedicated
to “efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and their presumed, but not
demonstrated, effects.”
The U.S. justification for such
spending combating CO2 emissions is based on the 1979 Charney Report, published
by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The Charney Report theorized
that if CO2 in the atmosphere were to double, the earth’s surface temperature
would increase by roughly 6 degrees Fahrenheit, with a margin of error of plus
or minus 3 degrees. However, the Charney Report also predicted a more powerful
warming trend caused by an increase in water vapor, earth’s dominant greenhouse
gas.
The CRS report states: “In 1979,
scientists lacked any comprehensive measurements of atmospheric temperatures,
so the Charney Report’s guesses could not be confirmed or denied. But to cause
this ‘top-down warming,’ the warming trends in the atmosphere would have to be
more pronounced than surface warming trends.” That’s because much of the
energy from atmospheric warming is lost in space and doesn’t not affect
surface temperature.
Despite the fact that the Charney
Report’s data was unconfirmed, it heavily influenced the 1992 U.N. Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed by President George H.W. Bush and
ratified, with stipulations, by the Senate. The treaty’s main goal was
“stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level
that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate
system.”
The UNFCCC aimed to combat the rise
of greenhouse gas, even though insufficient data had been gathered to confirm
the Charney Report’s hypothesis that greenhouse gases were contributing to
global warming.
Meanwhile, “independent researchers
have tested the Charney Report’s hypothesis against atmospheric temperature
data, which now extends over 37 years, and found the hypothesis wanting,” the
CRS report states.
New methods and equipment have been
developed to test the hypothesis, and the data does not confirm it. As the
report declares, “the hypothesis needs to be modified or discarded.” However,
the U.S. government continues to fund projects based on the faulty hypothesis.
Although it seems clear that the
bulk of U.S. climate-change funding should go into research so that the actual
cause of climate change, as well as its potential impact can be
ascertained, more than $104.25 billion goes to projects other than scientific
research, compared to only $42.49 billion sent to research projects.
Annual expenditures in research have
increased by 200 percent since 1993, while other climate change-related
expenditures have gone up by an astounding 850 percent. The combined cost of
climate-change policy has been $166 billion from 1993 to 2014.
Comments
The real cost is in the $trillions
when you add in the cost of constructing wind and solar equipment
installations. Remember to thank a Democrat.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party
Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment