“[The Waxman-Markey] 1,400-page bill is a farce. They bought every industry off—steel mills, agriculture, utilities…. I would not only not vote for it. I am opposed to it entirely, because it does damage to those of us who believe that we need to act in a rational fashion about climate change.”
– Senator John McCain to Stephen Moore, Wall Street Journal, August 1-2, 2009, p. A9.
“The truth is, the climate course set by Waxman-Markey is a disaster course. It is an exceedingly inefficient way to get a small reduction of emissions. It is less than worthless….”
-James Hansen, “Strategies to Address Global Warming,” July 13, 2009.
The death of federal climate legislation in 2009 will not only be because traditional Republicans and conservative Democrats said “no”. It will also be because true believers like Senator John McCain realize that politicized cap-and-trade is all pain and no gain.…
Continue ReadingRecommended Post
Marlo Lewis: July 24, 2009: Is the Climate Science Debate Over? No, It’s Just Getting Very, Very Interesting (with welcome news for mankind)
Most Read Posts
Climate Impacts of Waxman-Markey (the IPCC-based arithmetic of no gain) 10,978 Views (Chip Knappenberger)
Joseph Romm and Enron: For the Record 3,079 Views (Rob Bradley)
Smart Grid, Dumb Economics 2,361 Views (Jerry Taylor)
Climate Impacts of Waxman-Markey (Part II)—Global Sign-Up 2,165 Views (Chip Knappenberger)
Is the Climate Science Debate Over? No, It’s Just Getting Very, Very Interesting (with welcome news for mankind) 1,780 Views (Marlo Lewis)
Climate Alarmism Bullying: L’affaire Schmidt (new) … L’affaire Wigley (old) 1,701 Views (Rob Bradley)
The New MIT Climate Study: A Real World Inversion? 1,496 Views (Chip Knappenberger)
CO2 Regulation under the Clean Air Act: Economic Train Wreck, Constitutional Crisis, Legislative Thuggery 1,296 Views (Marlo Lewis)
Most Active Posts
Is the Climate Science Debate Over?…
Continue ReadingThe Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) plans to issue a “revised” report on the role of speculation in the recently concluded oil price boom, reversing last year’s conclusion that such betting was not a major factor relative to underlying physical fundamentals. The CFTC’s interim report concluded last year that “current oil prices and the increase in oil prices between January 2003 and June 2008 are largely due to fundamental supply and demand factors.”
The reversal is said to reflect better data on who was actually in the market, including evidence that some traders had massive positions. But clearly the political bent of the leadership has changed as well, especially after the credit derivatives fiasco last year.
Political Risk As a Fundamental
Without question, commodity indices and other similar funds have allowed a lot of capital to flow into the market, and the fundamentals would not seem to justify prices reaching $147 per barrel.…
Continue Reading