<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Climate Impacts of Waxman-Markey (Part II)—Global Sign-Up</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/</link>
	<description>A free-market energy blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:41:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry Berg</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-12759</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry Berg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:14:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-12759</guid>
		<description>For those who think forcing GHG reductions is the &quot;right&quot; thing to do for our grand children, even if it does not begin to save the planet from itself (if, in fact, it actually needs saving), keep this in mind. 

My rough calculation for the electric power sector, which is responsible for about 40% of U.S. anthropogenic CO2 emissions, indicates that to reduce emissions from that sector by just 20% (about 450-500 million tons per year) via a calculated move to a &quot;cleaner&quot; energy mix (less fossil, more nuke and renewable) will cost us about $1 trillion. And that 20% reduction will clearly have a wholly insignificant global effect, so we will need to do much more than that. So how many trillions will it take from the electric sector? From the transportation sector? From the industrial sector? How many trillions can we afford or have the conviction to throw at this?  

I, for one, want to avoid burdening future generations with outrageous and unnecessary debt simply because we spent that money for no real effect but had hopes that China and others just might follow along, in which case there will still be no guarantee that our climate will be significantly different that if we had done nothing at all.

Folks - this is a global issue that, at the very least, REQUIRES a coordinated global assessment, concurrence and action plan, if necessary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For those who think forcing GHG reductions is the &#8220;right&#8221; thing to do for our grand children, even if it does not begin to save the planet from itself (if, in fact, it actually needs saving), keep this in mind. </p>
<p>My rough calculation for the electric power sector, which is responsible for about 40% of U.S. anthropogenic CO2 emissions, indicates that to reduce emissions from that sector by just 20% (about 450-500 million tons per year) via a calculated move to a &#8220;cleaner&#8221; energy mix (less fossil, more nuke and renewable) will cost us about $1 trillion. And that 20% reduction will clearly have a wholly insignificant global effect, so we will need to do much more than that. So how many trillions will it take from the electric sector? From the transportation sector? From the industrial sector? How many trillions can we afford or have the conviction to throw at this?  </p>
<p>I, for one, want to avoid burdening future generations with outrageous and unnecessary debt simply because we spent that money for no real effect but had hopes that China and others just might follow along, in which case there will still be no guarantee that our climate will be significantly different that if we had done nothing at all.</p>
<p>Folks &#8211; this is a global issue that, at the very least, REQUIRES a coordinated global assessment, concurrence and action plan, if necessary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lena Lang</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-4532</link>
		<dc:creator>Lena Lang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:25:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-4532</guid>
		<description>This report ignores the so-obvious reality that China &amp; India are unlikely to shift to a clean energy future without US leadership.

The US is the leader in international politics, as the hegemonic player, and needs to wake up to this responsibility.  Other EU countries are setting targets and doing their bit, but the US has their head in the sand because it&#039;s such a &quot;challenge&quot;. Why cannot it be seen as an opportunity?  The US can shift from finite depletable resources to sustainable sources; which will have to occur in the long-term anyway.

Travis Monitor - I suggest you educate yourself on the methane hydrates under the Siberian permafrost, and other tipping points.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This report ignores the so-obvious reality that China &amp; India are unlikely to shift to a clean energy future without US leadership.</p>
<p>The US is the leader in international politics, as the hegemonic player, and needs to wake up to this responsibility.  Other EU countries are setting targets and doing their bit, but the US has their head in the sand because it&#8217;s such a &#8220;challenge&#8221;. Why cannot it be seen as an opportunity?  The US can shift from finite depletable resources to sustainable sources; which will have to occur in the long-term anyway.</p>
<p>Travis Monitor &#8211; I suggest you educate yourself on the methane hydrates under the Siberian permafrost, and other tipping points.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Even the Generals are Worried! Mission Creep, Climate Change, and National Security (Part 1) &#8212; MasterResource</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-1468</link>
		<dc:creator>Even the Generals are Worried! Mission Creep, Climate Change, and National Security (Part 1) &#8212; MasterResource</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:04:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-1468</guid>
		<description>[...] climate policies would avert. That&#8217;s hardly surprising, since as Chip Knappenberger has demonstrated, reducing U.S. emissions 83% below 2005 levels by 2050 &#8212; the Waxman-Markey [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] climate policies would avert. That&#8217;s hardly surprising, since as Chip Knappenberger has demonstrated, reducing U.S. emissions 83% below 2005 levels by 2050 &#8212; the Waxman-Markey [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Worth Re-reading Weekend (MasterResource works for lazy summer days too) &#8212; MasterResource</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-1467</link>
		<dc:creator>Worth Re-reading Weekend (MasterResource works for lazy summer days too) &#8212; MasterResource</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2009 15:28:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-1467</guid>
		<description>[...] Climate Impacts of Waxman-Markey (Part II)—Global Sign-Up 2,165 Views (Chip Knappenberger) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Climate Impacts of Waxman-Markey (Part II)—Global Sign-Up 2,165 Views (Chip Knappenberger) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Broad Mind &#187; Schelling on Climate Change</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-1457</link>
		<dc:creator>The Broad Mind &#187; Schelling on Climate Change</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:32:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-1457</guid>
		<description>[...] The Democrats could barely pass Waxman-Markey with an overwhelming majority, and that bill will do little to alleviate greenhouse gas [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Democrats could barely pass Waxman-Markey with an overwhelming majority, and that bill will do little to alleviate greenhouse gas [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Farce of Climate Policy &#171; Time to Choose Again</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-1456</link>
		<dc:creator>The Farce of Climate Policy &#171; Time to Choose Again</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:22:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-1456</guid>
		<description>[...] bill would have on future climate. It turns out that it is totally ineffectually and even getting the whole world to take part doesn&#8217;t help much. The idea of &#8220;stopping&#8221; climate change is so [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] bill would have on future climate. It turns out that it is totally ineffectually and even getting the whole world to take part doesn&#8217;t help much. The idea of &#8220;stopping&#8221; climate change is so [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Molto rumore per nulla &#124; Climate Monitor</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-1463</link>
		<dc:creator>Molto rumore per nulla &#124; Climate Monitor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 15:10:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-1463</guid>
		<description>[...] Change - National Center for Atmospheric Research - Environmental Protection Agency [&#8617;]qui e qui trovate la trattazione completa [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Change &#8211; National Center for Atmospheric Research &#8211; Environmental Protection Agency [&#8617;]qui e qui trovate la trattazione completa [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: If Waxman-Markey Went Global&#8230; &#171; The Unbearable Nakedness of CLIMATE CHANGE</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-1466</link>
		<dc:creator>If Waxman-Markey Went Global&#8230; &#171; The Unbearable Nakedness of CLIMATE CHANGE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:09:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-1466</guid>
		<description>[...] All figures come from MasterResource. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] All figures come from MasterResource. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick Sharp</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-1460</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick Sharp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:41:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-1460</guid>
		<description>Anyone who thinks the Chinese are going to follow our example and risk destroying their economy is beyond naive. This coming from a westerner living in  and doing business in Beijing for many years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone who thinks the Chinese are going to follow our example and risk destroying their economy is beyond naive. This coming from a westerner living in  and doing business in Beijing for many years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cap and Trade &#124; Detached Ideas</title>
		<link>http://www.masterresource.org/2009/05/part-ii-a-climate-analysis-of-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill%e2%80%94what-if-the-world-played-along/comment-page-1/#comment-1464</link>
		<dc:creator>Cap and Trade &#124; Detached Ideas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 18:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://masterresource.org/?p=2367#comment-1464</guid>
		<description>[...] by 2050 would still be less than 0.5° C.  Knappenberger&#8217;s analysis is given here and here, and assumes the IPCC mid-range or high-range emis­sions scenarios; for low-range scenarios the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] by 2050 would still be less than 0.5° C.  Knappenberger&#8217;s analysis is given here and here, and assumes the IPCC mid-range or high-range emis­sions scenarios; for low-range scenarios the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

