The American public is wising up about the theory of anthropogenic global warming and is expressing skepticism. Some would think that is progress, but not CNN’s Karen Chetry.
On the Oct. 18 broadcast of CNN’s “American Morning,” in an interview with Eric Larsen, a global warming alarmist engaged in the “Save the Poles Expedition [1],” which he visits the South Pole, North Pole and summit of Mt. Everest in one year to draw attention to global warming, Chetry expressed her concern that people aren’t as willing to buy into the global warming alarmism as they once were. She asked Larsen if that was the case.
“How do you, you know, when you talked about national action in terms of politics, I mean, it’s such a politically-charged issue,” Chetry said. “We have new polling that shows there’s been a bit of a shift in terms of whether people agree that global warming is a proven fact. We saw ClimateGate. We saw a lot of back and forth about cap-and-trade legislation. I mean, do you see us taking, perhaps some steps backward in people wanting to move on this issue?”
Larsen agreed – the American public isn’t buying into global warming like it once did. An Oct. 10 Rasmussen poll [2] reports 59 percent of Americans see global warming as a “serious issue,” but only 39 percent think climate change is caused by man – the lowest findings over the past six months. But he insisted the proper way of handling this is not to treat it like a political issue.
“Unfortunately, yes, I do,” Larsen replied. “I feel like the debate has circled back to where it was in maybe 2005 and 2006. The important thing, I think, is not to make this issue a – I mean it's a political issue, but not to make it political. We need to focus on energy efficiency, on creating new renewable energy, creating jobs. And these are good for our economy, good for businesses. It doesn't have to be a political issue. We can protect our environment, stop global warming, and still be smart about our economy and our country.”
Larsen wants to have his cake and eat it too, and his plea doesn’t add up if you look at the economic impact. Much of the legislation coming out of Washington, D.C. done in the name of solving global warming comes with some hefty price tags. The Heritage Foundation estimated in 2009 cap-and-trade hit farmers pretty hard:
• Farm income (or the amount left over after paying all expenses) is expected to drop $8 billion in 2012, $25 billion in 2024, and over $50 billion in 2035. These are decreases of 28%, 60% and 94%, respectively.
• The average net income lost over the 2010-2035 timeline is $23 billion – a 57 percent decrease from the baseline.
• Construction costs of farm buildings will go up by 5.5 percent in 2025 and 10 percent by 2034 (from the baseline).
• By 2035, gasoline and diesel costs are expected to be 58 percent higher and electric rates 90 percent higher.
Nicolas Loris, writing for Heritage, explained these costs would be eventually passed along to consumers even though the legislation would a minimal effect on the globe’s climate.