Disagrees on climate change
This letter is written in response the Leah DeAnda”s opinion “An Alternative Approach: Time For Some Change.”
I would agree with Leah DeAnda that its time for an alternative approach in our discussion about climate change. But I disagree with Ms. DeAnda”s methods. Here are some recent facts:
On June 4, 2014 Prime Minister of Australia Abbott (who calls climate change “a bunch of crap”) flew to Canada to meet with Prime Minister Stephen Harper specifically to oppose President Obama”s G-7 agenda item to address climate change. Canadian Prime Minister Harper is not a “denier,” but had this to say:
“No country is going to undertake actions on climate change, no matter what they say… that is going to deliberately destroy jobs and growth in their country. We are just a little more frank about that, but that is the approach that every country is seeking.”
During the June G-7 meeting German Chancellor Merkel specifically put European energy security far ahead of climate change despite President Obama”s agenda item because although Germany”s renewables supply 25 percent of Germany”s energy, at far higher cost than carbon energy, German industry is increasingly noncompetitive, and dependent on cheap gas and oil supplies from Russia to counterbalance the high cost of renewables. President Putin is not only a “denier” but scoffs at the idea of climate change.
The 2013 Copenhagen Climate Change Conference collapsed. Further, the U.S. has passed no carbon trading legislation because of cost to the US economy during the recession. President Obama”s name calling our closest climate change allies “deniers” has alienated the U.S.”s closest allies.
Here in Lake County last winter I talked to seniors and families with young children who slept in 40-degree inside temperatures because they could not afford to heat their homes. Today in Lake County there are untold numbers of local seniors who can”t turn on air conditioning in the 104-plus degree heat, risking heat stroke. Are they “deniers”? This is Prime Minister Haper”s point in the above quote. No rational nation is willing to sacrifice its citizens and economies on the alter of climate change without its true believers addressing a few legitimate questions about human costs and economic costs.
California enacted the Global Warming Solutions Act, and we all now pay a carbon tax. How much more does electricity, gas and other energy cost individual residents of Lake County than energy costs residents of Kansas, or Arizona, or Utah and other states pay without the carbon tax? Cost does matter. And also what about an honest discussion of the science. NOAA announced this year that its string of scientifically placed temperature stations (USCRN) show the temperature of the U.S. has decreased .4 degrees Celsius over the last 10 years. Are we cooling or warming? The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration says we”re cooling. Why are Californian”s paying a carbon tax then — to prevent “global warming”? When its cooling. People want to know.
A new approach might be for climate change advocates to not engage in ad ho-mien attacks on the personal character of people by calling “deniers,” but to debate the facts and issues, including cost. Name calling is an approach that alienates friends, polarizes, and prevents legitimate policy debate.
— Val McMurdie, Lakeport
