Global Warming--Command And Control Or Technological Approach?

Sen. James Inhofe lays out the economic stakes of a planned cap-and-trade scheme that would only exacerbate current economic downturns by crippling the American economy--and offers in its stead a free market, technology approach that would likely prove immensely more successful in its state goal of cleaning the environment while also keeping the economy strong:

The United States Senate will soon begin to debate a global warming cap-and-trade bill that, if passed, would impose severe economic constraints on American families and American workers for no environmental gain. We have had this debate before, starting with the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol in 1998, then again in 2003, and again in 2005. Each time, these cap-and-trade measures were defeated for two simple reasons: they did not include developing nations; and because of the significant economic impact on the American public. With the American economy facing troubles, now is certainly not the time to try this costly experiment.

What proponents of this bill fail to understand is that the American environmental success story has been built while growing our economy. Over the past three decades, Americans have proven that we can clean up our environment while expanding our population and vibrantly growing our economy. Democrats and their special interest allies have consistently taken the opposite approach and emphasized job-killing regulations and expanding the government’s power. The U.S. can follow a path of onerous government mandates or we can follow a path of developing and encouraging new technologies. A simple history lesson reveals that the technological approach is the only viable path forward as carbon cap-and-trade mandates are proving to be a failure throughout the developed world.
. . .
The Lieberman-Warner command and control path utterly fails in comparison to an approach that embraces and develops new technologies. A technology emphasis is the only politically and economically sustainable path forward. I have long advocated a technology approach that brings in the developing world nations such as China and India. My home state of Oklahoma demonstrates that tomorrow’s energy mix must include more natural gas, wind and geothermal, but it must also include oil, coal, and nuclear energy, which is the world's largest source of emission-free energy. This approach serves multiple purposes – it will reduce air pollution, expand our energy supply, increase trade, and, along with these other goals, reduce greenhouse gases. Developing and expanding domestic energy will translate into energy security and ensure stable sources of supply and well-paying jobs for Americans.

Will the United States Senate choose the economically harmful Lieberman-Warner bill or the new technology path? With five weeks to go until the debate, the question is largely up to you. If you believe, like I do that we must not impose more costly mandates on the American people, I urge you to engage in the debate and contact your Senator and make your voice heard.

Sen. Inhofe--Global Warming Tipping Point Reached

Not in reaching the point of no return, but in the line of credulity with Al Gore's global warming hysteria/hypocrisy:

EPW Now Has Competing Blogs

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, the people running the EPW's (now) minority blog have seen their competition give blogging a try--though it will be hard for the newcomers to repeat the original blog's success, including links from Drudge that shut down the Senate's servers.

The global warming debate in the Senate's EPW Committee just got a little hotter. Or colder. Or saw a change in climate--or whatever the heck global warming is supposed to do to the weather these days.

Inhofe Responds To RFK's "Traitor" Comment

To the video:



In other climate news--
Katrina devastation not unrivaled--in fact, coastal development, not warming oceans, should be our biggest concern.

Global Warming and Solar Radiation--is there a link? (that's sarcasm, folks!)

Al Gore's Live Earth A Dismal Failure

Not much heat generated for NBC

A "foul-mouthed flop" in the UK

"Guru" Laurie David In Denver; Talks Al Gore, Sen. Inhofe

Activist, producer of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, and global warming nannyist Laurie David will speak in Denver tonight to a sold out(?) crowd:

2 What was it like to work with Al Gore?

By the time I was done working with him, I was begging him to adopt me. He's like a father figure to me, one of my heroes. He's so charming and lovely and smart and funny. He makes fun of himself; he's got a great sense of humor. He's dry and he laughs at other people's jokes. [Al Gore is charming and lovely and smart and funny? Must have missed that in the 2000 election--ed.]

3 If you could have dinner with Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who called global warming the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people," what would you say to him?

There's something in my heart that makes me believe if I could get 10 minutes with these guys, I could change their mind. I would love to have dinner with Inhofe. We're at the point where we have to do something big to stop global warming. I would want him to watch the movie. I would pop the popcorn. I would pick up the check (for dinner).

4 So how do you react to the Bush administration's stance on global warming?

It's terrifying. I've spent a lot of time saying to people that I believe the changes are going to come when these guys are still in office. I don't personally believe we have two years to waste before we start solving this. I'm not focused on '08. I'm focused on right now. Here's a perfect analogy: if you had a choice between being in a 5 mile-per-hour car accident or a 50 mile-per-hour car accident, what would you choose? I would choose everything we have to do avoid the larger collision ahead.

5 What changes have you made in your own life?

I don't believe everyone has to do everything. I don't do everything. It's about everyone doing something. I have changed as many lightbulbs as I could to (higher efficiency) bulbs. I started a new idling rule at the school carpool lane (cars dropping and picking up kids can't idle their engines more than 30 seconds). I bring a garment bag to the dry cleaners (instead of having the dry cleaners wrap her clothes in petroleum-based plastic). I drive a hybrid. [nothing much really, but it makes me feel good inside; you, however, are asked to do more--ed.]

Inhofe Challenges Hollywood To Take "Gore Pledge"

How much you wanna bet the Hollywood moonbat hypocrites won't take up Sen. Inhofe's offer?

A leading skeptic of global-warming science is challenging celebrity activists such as Al Gore and Sheryl Crow to lower their "carbon footprint" to the same level as the average American by Earth Day in April 2008.

"I simply believe that former Vice President Al Gore and his Hollywood friends who demand we change the way we live to avert this over-hyped 'crisis' not only talk the talk, but walk the walk," said Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican.

"How hard is it for these elitists to become as frugal in their energy consumption as the average American? I think the American public has a right to know they are being had."

A so-called "Gore Pledge" was introduced last month when the former vice president appeared before a Senate committee to discuss his views on climate change. Mr. Inhofe asked Mr. Gore to sign the pledge to reduce his use of products that produce greenhouse gases, but he declined, instead citing alternative carbon trade-offs.