Waxbag-Malarkey Carbon Cap & Scam Ping - (POGW)
Posted on 07/01/2009 9:40:38 AM PDT by dennisw
The bill proposes a massive and highly regressive tax on the U.S. economy, and could potentially cause not only extensive business failures, unemployment and privation within our borders, but starvation among poorer populations elsewhere. . . .
According to a report issued by the Environmental Protection Agency in April, by 2015 the price of carbon emission indulgences required by the bill for industries to operate could be expected to run between $13 and $17 per ton of CO2 emitted. . . . [L]et’s stipulate the $15/ton midrange of the EPA estimate, and see what it implies.
The United States emits about 9 billion tons of CO2 per year. Therefore, at a rate of $15/ton fee for emission indulgences, the bill would impose a tax of $135 billion per year on the nation. Divided by the U.S. population of 300 million, that works out to a cost of $450 per year levied on every American man, woman or child, or $1,800 for a family of four. While for wealthy individuals like Al Gore such an impost might represent a mere pittance, for working families struggling hard to make ends meet it would be a very significant burden.
But that is not even the worst part of it. As a result of the markup of carbon costs, a lot of those working families will be out of work and unable to pay their existing bills, let alone new ones. Consider: Burning one ton of coal produces about three tons of CO2. So a tax of $15 per ton of CO2 emitted is equivalent to a tax of $45/ton on coal. The price of Eastern anthracite coal runs in the neighborhood of $45/ton, so under the proposed system, such coal would be taxed at a rate of about 100 percent. The price of Western bituminous coal is currently about $12/ton. This coal would therefore be taxed at a rate of almost 400 percent. . . . By doubling or potentially even quadrupling the cost of their most basic feedstock, the cap-and-trade system’s indulgence fees could make many such businesses uncompetitive and ultimately throw millions of working men and women onto the unemployment lines.
A gallon of petroleum-derived liquid fuel produces about 20 pounds, or 1 percent of a ton, of CO2 when burned. But it takes about 1.5 gallons of oil to produce one gallon of refined liquid fuel. So a $15/ton tax on CO2 emissions will also cause an increase in the price of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel on the order of $0.22/gallon. This will not only hit consumers’ pockets, but increase transport costs throughout the economy, thereby disabling businesses and increasing unemployment levels still more. While harming the economy, such a gas tax will do nothing material toward the truly essential goal of decreasing America’s dependence on foreign oil. Indeed, the bill’s dramatic hikes in electricity costs will have the opposite effect, since only 3 percent of America’s electricity is derived from oil, and by forcefully increasing electric power costs, the bill will actually discourage adoption of electric means of transport, including mass-transit systems today and potentially plug-in hybrid cars in the future. America’s dependence on foreign oil could be substantially relieved by legislation requiring that new cars sold in the United States be flex-fueled and thus able to run equally well on alcohol fuels derived from a multitude of nonpetroleum sources, but the bill’s provisions in this area are so weak as to be worthless.
But all these bad aspects of the Waxman-Markey bill pale before its potential impact on the world’s food supply. . . . If you tax carbon, you tax fertilizer and pesticides. If you tax these things, you tax food, and by no small amount. A $15/ton CO2 tax would increase fertilizer production costs directly by about $60/ton, with the cap-and-trade bill’s increased transport costs inflating the burden still more. That’s enough to make many farmers use less fertilizer, and less fertilizer means less food.
To get a sense of what it would mean for farmers to abandon fertilizer, it is only necessary to go to the supermarket and compare the price of the “organic” produce, grown without chemical fertilizer, to the regular produce, which, while just as nutritious, typically costs less than half as much. It is one thing for wealthy organic food buffs to voluntarily pay such high prices for their food — that is their right. But to impose such costs for basic groceries on everyone else, and particularly the poor, as part of a largely symbolic effort to try to change the weather, is self-indulgent in the extreme.
In the 220 years of our republic, there may have been worse pieces of legislation enacted by Congress than the Waxman-Markey bill, but none readily comes to mind. The Senate needs to take a stand and stop this disastrous act from passing into law.
“Robert Zubrin thinks Waxman-Markey might be the worst bill ever.”
Might be?? The Europeans have finally conquered us and all we see from the propaganda arm (aka main stream media) of the government is boo hoo and worrying about Michael Jackson’s kids!
Dear God, I hope this doesn’t pass the Senate.....
Anyone have any hints to how each Senator is leaning?
Waxbag-Malarkey Carbon Cap & Scam Ping - (POGW)
Ping. Going to send this out later.
That is some heavy liquid fuel.
I don’t believe it has anything to do with carbon emissions. It has to do with this administrations desire to get more of our tax money and to also break the back of this country. The President is supporting more and more middle east countries, as well as Acorn, at our expense.
The Europeans, the Chinese, the Radical Muslims, the International Marxists, they have all conquered us by the simple act of 50+% of U.S. voters throwing up their hands and saying "I surrender".
This is what happens when you let children play with legislation.
Robert Zubrin thinks Waxman-Markey might be the worst bill ever. (he has the numbers)
Apparently Zubrin has never seen the "Fair Tax" bill.
I don't think anybody will ever top that.
That is some heavy liquid fuel.
A gallon of water weighs 8 lbs
Lets say that a gallon of gasoline weighs 7 lbs
When the carbon and hydrogen atoms combine with the O2 in the atmosphere I can see it coming out to 20 lbs of CO2. Water will also be produced. Most of the weight of hydrocarbons is the carbon molecules. Hydrogen molecules are lighter`
“they have all conquered us by the simple act of 50+% of U.S. voters throwing up their hands and saying “I surrender”.
Lovely. 1/2 the country has gone French...
The Socialist’s plan is to price it high and negotiate it down to what they REALLY wanted.
The republican opposition in the Senate will congratulate themselves if they can stop one third of this crap and trade from becoming law.
What will remain will be our loss of freedom BUT, our party can and will say, we stopped as much as we could, just keep us in office in 2010 and we’ll kill all of it. We promise.
http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/420f05001.htm
Finally, to calculate the CO2 emissions from a gallon of fuel, the carbon emissions are multiplied by the ratio of the molecular weight of CO2 (m.w. 44) to the molecular weight of carbon (m.w.12): 44/12.
CO2 emissions from a gallon of gasoline = 2,421 grams x 0.99 x (44/12) = 8,788 grams = 8.8 kg/gallon = 19.4 pounds/gallon
CO2 emissions from a gallon of diesel = 2,778 grams x 0.99 x (44/12) = 10,084 grams = 10.1 kg/gallon = 22.2 pounds/gallon
This implies an added tax of 45 cents per gallon of gas.
For each carbon atom freed, assuming pure burn, you attach two oxygen atoms, therefore the total weight (mass actually) of the residual gas is heavier. The total weight of the water adds to that because it also adds another oxygen atom to each hydrogen pair.
It seems wrong until you consider the mass of the oxygen.
Which begs another point; does this bill differentiate between mass and weight? Hmmmmmm...
So Zubrins numbers are correct
Far left.
Where’s Michael Jackson when you need her!
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.