Sharon Begley?s latest Newsweek column continues the media drumbeat for global warming alarmism (if ?the world gets closer to a consensus that we need to slash CO2 emissions,? why are many scientists ? more than 600 in North Carolina alone ? rejecting the idea?), but Begley makes an astute observation: using compact fluorescent light bulbs, taking the bus, and installing solar panels aren?t going to make any substantial impact in addressing the global temperature.
If global warming is going to cause problems, then, we?ll need some major technological breakthroughs, Begley tells us. So how do we get there?
Not by ruining the economy through a cap-and-trade scheme, as experts such as Roy Spencer have explained:
Kokai: If we take the steps that you mention, the ones that could be incredibly damaging to the poor and to the economy as a whole, will that hurt us in the future if we do need to take some steps to deal with global warming?
Spencer: Excellent question. I?ve made this point in the book. If you really are serious about solving this problem, that is, you really want to cut down on carbon dioxide emissions by, say, at least 50 percent to 75 percent, the only way to do it is through new technologies. Well, which countries in the world are going to come up with these new technologies? It?s the countries that have built the wealth where they can invest in the R&D to generate those new technologies. So in the process of passing these laws that are probably going to get passed next year or the year after, we are going to hurt the economy in such a way that it might actually delay finding those new technologies. We?re hurting the economy, and what?s being planned is going to have no measurable effect on future temperatures.
