Posted: 04/03/2006
Global Warming Legislation Should Take Economic Approach
NCPA Scholar urges Congress to focus on adaptation
DALLAS (April 3, 2006) - On the eve of Senate hearings into global warming legislation that will feature industry representatives of some of the nation's largest electric utilities as well as several environmental activists, National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) Senior Fellow H. Sterling Burnett issued Congress a warning: "Be careful of the economic backlash a preventative strategy to global warming will likely create."
"Congress has, rightly or wrongly, concluded that humans cause global warming," said Burnett. "Now certain industry groups, viewing greenhouse gas emission cuts as inevitable, hope to cut the best deal for their companies or industries - undermining the on-going scientific search for truth and selling out the American public in the process."
According to Burnett, those chosen to testify will likely ignore both the climate impact (or lack thereof) and the economic harm of proposed mandatory cuts of greenhouse gas emissions.
For instance, the proposed mandatory caps on greenhouse gas, like those proposed in Kyoto and in the McCain-Lieberman bill, would at best prevent less than a .20 degree rise in temperature 100 years from now. Additionally, every credible economic study examining the issue has shown that those caps would impose substantial costs on the economy, leading to unemployment and higher prices for food and fuel and harming low income individuals as a result.
Likewise, recent research, including a study released by the NCPA, shows that causation aside, the most effective response to global warming is to directly attack the problems that warming is predicted to exacerbate - like coastal flooding, the spread of malaria and other tropical diseases and hunger - rather than through trying to slow the rise of greenhouse gases. For instance:
- Meeting Kyoto emission targets would reduce fatalities from malaria by one-half of one percent, but investing an additional $1.5 billion annually for treatment would cut the death toll in half.
- Successfully complying with Kyoto would reduce the population at risk for hunger by only 2 percent by 2085, but investing an additional $5 billion to solve agricultural problems in developing countries would reduce hunger by 50 percent beginning today.
- The population at risk for coastal flooding would decline by meeting Kyoto emission standards, but at a cost of $165 billion a year. By contrast, investing an additional $1 billion annually in preventive measures would address the problem just as well, if not more effectively.
"Adapting to climate change would enhance both economic development and human capital and increase the capacity for technological innovation in developing countries," said Burnett. "Preventive strategies will by default condemn thousands to poverty, disease and death."