Not just for energy, but for
every aspect of our lives, living standards, culture and freedoms
David
Wojick and Paul Driessen
Kamala
Harris co-sponsored the Senate resolution to support the Green New Deal. Now
Joe Biden has endorsed the plan. Naturally, people want to know what the GND
will cost – usually meaning in state and federal government spending. But that
is the wrong question.
The
real question is, how much do Green New Dealers expect to get out of it, at
what total cost? Mr. Biden says he
wants the feds to spend nearly $7 trillion over the next decade on healthcare,
energy and housing transformation, climate change and other GND agenda items.
But that is only part of the picture.
Representative
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (who has a degree in some socialist version of economics)
and the folks who helped her write Biden's so-called Climate Plan have a clear
idea of how much money they want, and pretty much know where they expect the
money to come from. Here it is in its clearest form, as stated by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s
then chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti:
“The resolution
describes the 10-year plan to transform every sector of our economy to
remove GHG [greenhouse gases] and pollution. It says it does this through huge
investments in renewables, at WW2 scales (which was 40-60% of America’s GDP).”
[emphasis added]
World
War II was a time of great sacrifice and hardship, as part of a dramatic and
historic mobilization to win a horrific global war. However, that hard reality
doesn’t matter to these folks. They say we are now waging a war to stop
catastrophic climate change. So money, sacrifice and disruption are irrelevant.
Our
nation’s GDP is around $20 trillion a year, or $200 trillion in ten years.
40-60% of that is $80-120 trillion. For simplicity, let’s
call it an even $100 trillion to finance the Green New Deal utopian dream.
$100
trillion! The ways and means of raising this stupendous sum are also clear in
their minds. It will be done the same way WW2 was financed, however that was. To
them, it’s obvious that we can simply do this, because we did it before. The
specifics don’t matter. Government elites will figure them out.
But
even this arrogant, cavalier attitude is only part of the picture.
If
you read what Green New Dealers say, confusion arises because people think the
GND is an ordinary policy proposal: “Here’s
what we want done, and this what it should cost.” It is nothing like that. The
Green New Deal is more along the lines of, “Here’s
the level of effort we require to transform our entire economy, and this is
what we should be able to do with that much money.”
People
tend to interpret Green New Dealer talk of a WW2-like mobilization as a simple metaphor.
But these folks mean it as an actual measure of what they are determined to do.
So far they have glossed over and ignored the extreme hardships of
mobilization. Here’s just one example – not from front lines mayhem, but from
the United States home front during World War II.
Gasoline,
meat and clothing were tightly rationed. Most families were allocated three US
gallons of gasoline a week, which sharply curtailed driving for any purpose.
Production of most durable goods, like cars, new housing, vacuum cleaners and
kitchen appliances, was banned until the war ended. In industrial areas housing
was in short supply as people doubled up and lived in cramped quarters. Prices
and wages were controlled. [Harold
Vatter, The US Economy in World War II]
No
doubt the Green New Deal mobilization would impose different hardships. But all
mobilizations are oppressive. You can’t commandeer
half of the GDP without inflicting severe disruption on people’s
lives.
The
argument is sound in its way, provided there is a need for all-out war – which there is not.
The minor to modest temperature,
climate and extreme weather changes we’ve been seeing (in the real
world outside computer models) explain
why most Americans see no need for a painful war. So does the fact that China,
India and other emerging economies are not about to give up fossil fuels
anytime soon.
In
fact, polls show that roughly half of Americans do not even
believe in
the idea of human caused global warming, much less that it is an “existential threat,” as Senator Harris
claims it is. The latest Gallup poll found that only 1% of US adults consider “climate
change/environment/pollution” to be “the most important problem facing this
country today.” That’s down from a meager 2% in the May 28-June 4 poll.
Even
more revealing, a 2019 AP-NORC poll found that 68% of adult Americans were
unwilling to pay even an extra $10 on their monthly electricity bill to combat
global warming. Indeed, 57% of them would not be willing to pay more than $1.00
in added electricity charges to fight climate change!
Just
wait until they see what the Biden-Harris-AOC-Democrat Green New Deal would
cost them.
And
it’s not just that their costs would likely skyrocket from an average US 13.2¢
per kilowatt hour (11.4¢ or less in ten states) to well beyond the nearly 20¢
per kWh that families are already paying in California and New York, or the 30¢
that families are now paying in ultra-green Germany. Or that factories,
businesses, hospitals, schools and everyone else would also see their costs
escalate – with blue collar families, the sick and elderly, poor and minority
communities hammered hardest.
It’s
that the GND would force every American to replace their gasoline and diesel cars
and trucks with expensive short-haul electric vehicles; their gas furnaces and
stoves with electric systems; their home, local and state electrical and
transmission systems with expensive upgrades that can handle a totally electric
economy. They’ll see their landscapes, coastlines and wildlife habitats blanketed
with wind turbines, solar panels, transmission lines and warehouses filled with
thousands of half-ton batteries. Virtually every component of this GND nation
would be manufactured in
China and
other faraway places.
The
cost of this massive, total transformation of our energy and economic system
would easily reach $10 trillion: $30,000 per person or $120,000 per family – on
top of those skyrocketing electricity prices. And that’s just the intermittent,
unreliable energy component of this
all-encompassing Green New Deal.
These
are stupendous, outrageous costs and personal sacrifices. Every American, at
every campaign event and town meeting, should ask Green New Deal supporters if
they think America needs to – or can afford to – cough up $10 trillion or $100
trillion over the next ten years. And not let them get away with glib, evasive
answers, or attempts to laugh these questions off as meritless or irrelevant.
The
American people are not about to be mobilized into an all-out war against
dubious climate change, with price tags like these coupled with repeated
blackouts, huge personal sacrifices, and massive joblessness in every sector of
the economy – except among enlightened government ruling classes.
They’ve
already seen news stories about the latest rolling blackouts in California (here,
here, here
and here)
– resulting from one-third of that
state’s electricity coming from “renewable” sources, and with another third of
the state’s electricity imported from other states that also get heat waves.
They should ponder what their lives, livelihoods and living standards would be
under 100% wind and solar power.
And
yet, once again, even all this insanity is only a small part of the picture.
Remember,
the Green New Deal is also about government run healthcare – and an economy and
nation where “progressive” “woke” legislators, regulators, judges and activists
tell companies what they can manufacture and sell ... and tell us what we can
buy, eat and drink; how and how much we can heat and cool our homes; and what we
can read, hear, think and say, as they “transform” our culture and traditions.
The
GND is being promoted by politicians, news and social media, “educators” and “reformers”
who also want to eliminate free enterprise capitalism; have totally open
borders, even for criminals and people who might have Covid and other diseases;
and want to defund the police, put anarchists, looters and arsonists back on our
streets, and take away our right and ability to defend ourselves, our homes and
our families.
The
time to think long and hard about all of this is NOW. Not sometime after the
November 3 elections.
Paul Driessen is senior
policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org)
and author of books and articles on energy, environment, climate and human
rights issues. David Wojick is an independent analyst specializing in science,
logic and human rights in public policy, and author of numerous articles on
these topics.
No comments:
Post a Comment