Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy is championing a proposal to show the GOP is serious about climate change, but climate activists are already trashing the proposal as weak and misguided.
McCarthy’s proposal illustrates the trap awaiting Republican policymakers who believe they should assert there is a climate crisis while proposing an alternative, watered-down solutions to the Green New Deal and other Democrat-supported proposals.
As reported by Fox News, McCarthy’s plan focuses on three prongs. The first prong entails planting trees throughout the country.
This is in accordance with the global Trillion Trees Initiative launched last month at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
The second prong calls for doubling “investment” in “clean” air research and providing tax credits for companies that export low-emissions technologies.
The third prong focuses on conservation and sending American tax dollars to countries responsible for plastic pollution.
Regarding the first prong, The Verge website is already attacking the tree-planting plan as ineffective and counterproductive.
According to a January 31 article by The Verge:
“[D]ozens of scientists have warned that planting all those trees could potentially cause more harm than good. Others point to another solution with a more proven track record and that might be more deserving of global support — empowering the people who live in and safeguard forests already.
“Tree-planting started really trending in 2019 when a study published in the journal Science caused a commotion,” the article asserted. “It claimed that planting a trillion trees could capture more than a third of all the greenhouse gases humans have released since the industrial revolution. After the initial media blitz rallied excitement for the seemingly simple climate solution, a group of 46 scientists, including [Forrest Fleischman, who teaches natural resources policy at the University of Minnesota], responded to the study with their critique.”
The article continued:
“‘Headlines around the world declared tree planting to be the best solution to climate change,’ lead author of the critique Joseph Veldman said in a statement at the time. ‘We now know those headlines were wrong.’ Veldman argued that planting trees where they don’t belong can harm ecosystems, make wildfires worse, and even exacerbate global warming.
His critique made the case that the amount of carbon the study said 1 trillion trees could sequester was about five times too large. The study also considered planting trees on savannas and grasslands, where planting non-native trees could cause problems for local species.
Planting trees on snowy terrain that once reflected the sun could even turn those places into dark patches that actually absorb heat.”
Other websites allied with the Environmental Left have also been critical of climate plans focused on planting trees.
A Vice article is titled, “Planting ‘Billions of Trees’ Isn’t Going to Stop Climate Change”.
“Trying to Plant a Trillion Trees Won’t Solve Anything,” claims a Wired headline.
“Republicans’ Climate Change Plan Is Big Oil’s Climate Change Plan,” claims a New Republic headline.
GOP climate appeasers put themselves in a political box with no escape route.
After publicly supporting speculative, dubious assertions of a climate crisis, they are accused by the Climate Establishment of proposing half-baked measures that do little to mitigate rising temperatures.
And once they have stated that climate change is a serious problem – indeed a crisis – they will be boxed into supporting virtually anything the Environmental Left proposes.
After all, if the GOP joins alarmists asserting climate change is an existential crisis that is the greatest-ever threat to human civilization, the public will demand the most immediate and far-reaching responses.
There is no proposal too far-reaching if we are facing a climate apocalypse, and Republicans will be politically destroyed for proposing anything less.
Ultimately, Republicans should stand true to the science, which provides overwhelming evidence that we are not facing a climate crisis.
It is also worth noting how McCarthy’s other two areas of focus completely sell out conservative principles and the Republican Party base.
Regarding McCarthy’s second prong, the federal government already gives more source-specific taxpayer subsidies to wind power than all conventional energy sources combined (see Table 3 and 4 here).
The federal government does the same for solar power. How is raising taxes to double subsidies to already heavily subsidized wind and solar power a conservative idea?
Regarding McCarthy’s third prong, China is the country most responsible for plastic pollution, especially in the world’s oceans.
So the GOP’s climate change solution is to raise taxes again to send billions and billions of dollars to China to reward them for their plastic pollution? And how does cleaning up China’s plastic pollution have any impact on global temperatures?
Republican policymakers be forewarned: playing the Green New Deal-Lite game is a political game you cannot win.
Read more at CFACT
Exactly – the Tories in the UK have walked right into this trap and are now “forced” to implement policies that are nothing short of insane.
The previous mayor of Los Angeles, Tony Villar(aigosa) tried this “plant a million trees” idea about a decade ago in a bid to boost his national profile while attempting to run for POTUS. By the time he was term-limited out of the job, there certainly weren’t a million trees planted, indeed the number never even approached a hundred thousand, perhaps some tens of thousands – which included all the replantings of trees cut down for utility maintenance. So there was a net increase of a few thousands. How do the Davos dudes think their going to verify a net trillion more trees are being planted…
Planting trees won’t do any good!?
Well, planting a bunch of bird chomping windmills not only does nothing, but the resources required and the devastation to the land is enormous.
The US is providing “biomass” to the Drax power station in the UK at over 6.5 million tons per year. To do this over 300 square miles of forest is being stripped annually. This is seen as zero carbon renewable energy and gets over £2.5m daily in subsidies. Why is there no outcry over this?
I once got a tree in Kintergarten ina paper cup i planted it it grew tall and even though i dont live at the place anymore the tree is still there.Yes Trump has done better for this nation no matter what we hear from the liberal idiots and the M.S. Media scum suckers and the Dirty Demoocats
President Trump has the courage to call it what it is A HOAX .
A very very expensive hoax .
They are so mad because he ruined their globalist agenda .
The Green Deal isn’t about climate it is about the globalist agenda of world governed following the communist central planning model .
Politicians that cater to it are socialists .
There is lots to do to enhance and clean up out environment but the earth runs climate and we don’t even rank .
Maybe Kevin McCarthy is the guy setting the trap. David Lewis commented something we need to understand. The anarchists don’t want a solution for their fictitious climate change . They’re using it as a weapon against Capitalism. They won’t let us take that weapon from their hands. In order to expose them, keep suggesting rational solutions.
Planting trees is ‘feel good’. Cheap. Affordable .
But NO!
Sacrifice is the solution. We must build expensive machines that extract carbon dioxide from air and stuff that evil ‘carbon’ back where it came from. We must erect millions of huge ugly expensive wind turbines that extract small amounts of ‘free’ energy. We must ban the internal combustion engine. There’s more bad ideas, and they make no financial sense. Put them in a corner. Everyone likes money.
Feb 3, 2020 Scenario #4 | Real Climate Science
Video response to terroristic actions taken by the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. This video, the movie, and the follow-up series represent a nearly 100% outline of the ‘middle ground’ of climate science.
https://youtu.be/bl4cQKKudjM
So now according to the Global Warming/Climate Change Nut Cakes planting trees is bad maybe because to these nature prefectionists screwballs plants planted by nature are all right but trees planted by People is Bad Just how much more stupid could they ever be? Well Planting Trees wont stop Global Warming/Climate Change because there is No Global Warming/Climate Change
I agree with the authors observations completely. Indiscriminately planting one trillion trees seems like an over-simplified solution to a (probable) non problem. In the interest of an alternative to the Green New Deal, I’d suggest the republicans pursue the following to avoid the “climate trap”:
1.) Explain to taxpayers at every opportunity the difference between subsidies & tax incentives. Renewables receive subsidies, which is tax payer funded while oil & gas operators get tax deductions for intangible drilling costs & other equipment. Corporations are risking shareholder money, unlike renewables. These tax deductions encourage capital expenditures and are extended ALL U.S manufacturers. If anyone is a free loader, think wind & solar.
2.) Rather than allowing the “Climate Emergency” bilge to dominate the narrative, change the discussion! We are in the midst of an energy TRANSITION. So, the only thing that (really) matters is what clean, scalable & sustainable alternative do we have to replace fossil fuels. Those resources provide 80% of our nations primary energy and will not be readily replaced anytime soon. Americans need to understand the complexity, nuance and trade-offs to complete the transition of our energy system. The Green New Deal is a recipe for energy POVERTY.
3.) Start focusing R & D into energy initiatives that show promise to become the “Next Big Thing” as we progress into the remainder of the 21st century. Fusion, distributed nuclear power (thorium), advanced battery technologies, hydrogen fuel cells and the like fit that bill. Continued pursuit of low energy density, costly & intermittent energy sources like wind & solar are NOT the wave of the future.
4.) Insist on a full & impartial, scientific climate DEBATE. You cannot formulate sound energy & environmental policy based on HYSTERIA. Change the narrative!
That would be a start…
“Insist on a full & impartial, scientific climate DEBATE. You cannot formulate sound energy & environmental policy based on HYSTERIA. Change the narrative!”
AMEN to that! It’s way past time for “a full & impartial, scientific climate DEBATE.”
This journal article publicized January 20th says planting trees reduces the water available in an area and even dries up rivers. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200120113407.htm
title: Local water availability is permanently reduced after planting forests