My Local Government Update newsletter stirred up a hornets nest last week.  I re-posted Donna Martinez’s blog post about a global warming resolution in Apex. Councilman Bill Jensen proposed the resolution that encouraged developers and builders plan for future solar installations.  Two problems, resolutions that “encourage” are often changed to requirements and the factual “Whereas” statements were anything but factual. Here is my newsletter with a link to Donna’s post on Right Angles.

This is my analysis to Councilman Jensen’s “Whereas” statements. 






All of the ?Whereas? statements are contested by current
scientific or economic research and the second one contains a serious factual
error.

 

WHEREAS,
global warming is a worldwide problem that is exacerbated by manmade pollution
such as carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gasses.

 

Many highly qualified scientists, including Richard Lindzen,
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT, dispute the assertion of a
direct cause and effect relationship between ?manmade pollution? and global
warming.   The idea that
warming continues is simply not correct. According to Phil Jones director University of East Anglia?s Climatic
Research Unit and chief advisor to the IPCC, there has been no significant
warming over the last 15 years.

 

From UK?s Daily Mail:

?Professor Jones
also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than
now ? suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon. And he said
that for the past 15 years there has been no ?statistically significant?
warming.?[i]

 

WHEREAS,
carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and other heat trapping gasses are a byproduct
of coal and oil fired power plants, automobiles and other carbon burning
machinery.

 

The IPCC list of greenhouse gasses does not include sulfur
dioxide.  In fact, the IPCC argues
that sulfur dioxide aerosols primarily from electric power plants produce
significant cooling.

 

WHEREAS,
continued global warming will raise the sea level to the extent that
substantial portions of the North Carolina coastline will be engulfed.

 

As noted above, there has been no ?statistically
significant? warming for the last 15 years.  Also very recent research has shown that Greenland ice is
melting at half the previously predicted rate, thus calling into question sea
level rise predicted by global warming alarmists.[ii]
In addition, there is no evidence that the increase in sea level in North
Carolina is caused by recent global warming, that is pre-1995 warming. North
Carolina?s sea level has been rising at the same rate for well over a century.

 

WHEREAS,
consumable fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas continue to increase in
price each year as they become less and less available.

 

This statement is an example of junk economics.  Since 1946 there has been no consistent
upward trend in inflation adjusted crude oil prices.  The June 2008 price spike at $125 per barrel was followed by
a drastic decline to about $30 per barrel.  There is no economic basis to support your prediction that
the current price of about $70 per barrel will consistently trend upward.

 

WHEREAS,
the development of renewable energy resources will assist the United States in
becoming energy independent from foreign energy sources.

 

Many economists argue that using very expensive ?renewable?
energy (solar and wind) when much cheaper energy is available will further
damage the economy and destroy jobs. When it comes to electricity generation,
we do not rely on foreign oil. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, only 1.5% of all
petroleum used in the U.S. goes toward electricity production.[iii]
It should also be noted that almost all of the wind turbines being installed
today are imported.

 

WHEREAS,
the installation costs of renewable energy systems continues to decrease each
year.

 

The installation cost is irrelevant. The question is what
is the cost of electricity produced by renewable systems compared to the
conventionally produced electricity. For example, the United States Government Accountability Office
estimates that electricity from solar costs to be about 18-23 cents per
KWh.  This is about five to six
times more expensive than coal generated electricity?to put it another way,
consumers would have to pay about 600% more for electricity that comes from
solar power.[iv]

 

WHEREAS,
the plug-in electric automobile is already available and will become common in
the near future.

 

This is true only if the huge taxpayer subsidies
continue.  These subsidies divert
funds from the private sector where they would be invested in projects that
produce economic growth. 



[ii] http://www.johnlocke.org/newsletters/research/2010-09-16-tqkaaqj2oeqrhb3s0flvql2mp2-enviro-update.html

[iii] Total United States petroleum consumption data can be
found on the EIA site at www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html; total
petroleum consumption for electricity generation can be found on the EIA site
at www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat4p1.html.

[iv] United States Government Accountability Office. ?Advanced
Energy Technologies: Budget Trends and Challenges for DOE?s Energy R&D
Program,? Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment,
Committee on Science and Technology, House of Representatives, p. 10,

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08556t.pdf.