Posted on 06/12/2017 5:36:54 AM PDT by rktman
The U.S. government spent nearly as much fighting climate change between 1993 and 2014 as was spent on the entire Apollo program between 1962 and 1973, according to a new report.
A May 2017 report from the Capital Research Center (CRS) states that from FY 1993 to FY 2014 total U.S. expenditures on climate change amount to more than $166 billion.
The total includes more than $26.1 billion from President Obamas 2009 stimulus bill, as well as regular annual budget amounts and federal tax credits distributed over a period of 21 years.
In comparison, the U.S. spent $200 billion, adjusted for inflation, on the Apollo space program, which ran from 1962 until 1973 and flew 17 missions, including Apollo 11, which put a man on the moon for the first time. Through the program, the U.S. sent seven men to the moon and back.
The CRS report comes just as President Trump has announced that the U.S. is withdrawing from the Paris climate accord. Under the agreement, the U.S. would have been obligated to pay $3 billion to a green fund by 2020, among other expected contributions.
The report shows that annual expenditures on climate change have increased 490 percent since 1993, and the annual amount going through the U.N. for combating climate change internationally has climbed by 440 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
NON print version:
http://www.wnd.com/2017/06/climate-change-fight-has-cost-you-astronomical-figure/?cat_orig=money
Its about to cost me directly about $4K for a new central air unit thanks to the R22 ban Is anyone in the Trump admin reading this? Stop the R22 Ban now!!
And bring back DDT while they’re at it. The “hole” freon thing was a farce from day 1. Day 2 at the latest.
It has cost us trillions in foregone investments due to stupid regulations. The 166 billion is peanuts compared to that.
Initial costs only. Don’t even want to contemplate what we’d find if we extrapolate.
And what was the impact of spending Billions “fighting climate change/global-warming/global-cooling?”
ZERO IMPACT
Of course a bunch of political friends got rich. That’s about the only impact.
What bothers me the most is thinking about what we could accomplish for the environment with $166 billion if we spent it on something that matters instead of CO2. Waste should offend all decent people.
That was all money that could have been used in many constructive ways instead of being used to accomplish absolutely nothing.
Stuff and nonsense!!!
That $166 Billion is ONLY what the CRS has determined the government has DIRECTLY spent on “climate change.”
What about the cost of all the CAFE gasolines?
What about the cost of “polution controls” on vehicles?
What about the cost of energy besides gasoline?
What about the cost of (as mentioned above) refrigerants?
...and the list goes on and on.
To say that “climate change”, or the fight against it, cost US -you and me- only $166 Billion is a joke!
That’s why I said “You can’t contemplate if you extrapolate.” And, speaking of glowbull warming/climate change, currently 39 degrees at my house with cold rain. Couple hundred feet higher it’s snowing and there are chain controls on I-80 in the Sierras. WOO HOO! Happy June.
The “result” of this has been what? Mainly, money to LIB idiots (rich idiots) who push this crapola. What a criminal scam.
You forgot the “march against cattle farts!”
And we had a line of thunderstorms in the SF Bay Area that brought “unseasonably low” temperatures and some rain yesterday.
Lol! Became about 4 inches of slushy snow up on dinner/I80.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.