The president of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, an organization that represents 2.4 million black-owned businesses, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Oversight Subcommittee that Obama’s Clean Power Plan [CPP], that spans 1,560 confounding pages and gargles 76 different acronyms, would impose severe and disproportionate economic burdens on poor minority families.
Although his group had commissioned their own study of the CPP effects, all Harry Alford needed to do was read Obama’s own Analysis of the Impacts of the Clean Power Plan to discover that our dictator-in-chief is not only aware of the damage that this agenda will cause but couldn’t care less. Using the Energy Information Administration’s own data it is easy to see that this plan will slash real GDP by $39.7 billion a year; slice disposable income by $15.3 billion a year; chop manufacturing shipments by $45.4 billion a year; cut light-vehicle sales by 12,400 a year, hack non-farm employment by 35,000 jobs each year; and whack manufacturing employment by 68,000 jobs each year. And to what end?
Scientists who base their opinions on real world weather measurements and historical proxy temperature reconstructions, and who are aware of the benefit of carbon dioxide, all disagree with the need of the CPP.
Dr. Sherwood B. Idso, president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, a former research physicist with the Department of Agriculture at the U.S. Water Conservation Lab in Arizona, says that “literally” thousands of experiments have demonstrated that as the air’s carbon dioxide content rises, so too do the growth rates of nearly all plants, leading to a “great greening” of Earth which thankfully shows no signs of declining or even leveling off.
“If fossil fuel usage is not foolishly restricted, in a misguided attempt to prevent climate change, aka global warming, the expected increase in anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions will significantly enhance the yields and water use efficiencies of essentially all of the world’s food crops, allowing us to feed the world’s growing population.”
According to Dr. Idso, a developed analyzes of supply-and-demand scenario for food in the year 2050, revealed the world’s population would likely be 51% greater than it was in 1998, topping 9 billion people, whereas food production would be only 37% greater if we relied solely on anticipated improvements in agricultural technology. In order to avoid the unpalatable consequences of widespread hunger and early deaths it would be absolutely essential that carbon dioxide concentrations be allowed to continue to rise.
The increase in population requires not only an increase in food production but an equally significant amount of extra water to grow that extra food. Over the entire globe, a staggering 67% of the future population may experience some water stress, resulting in decrease in food production. FORTUNATELY, evelvated concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide not only reduces plant water loss by transpiration, but simultaneously enhances plant photosynthesis and biomass production enabling Earth’s vegetation to produce considerably more food per unit of water used.
Another condition to feeding the world’s burgeoning human population was identified by David Tillman, et al, in the academic journal Science in 2009. The diversion of crop from food to biofuel must end. “With limited water and limited crops, the conversion of food into fuel, while many still live in hunger and Earth’s population is expected to grow, is unconscionable.”
The Good News, by former IPCC delegate Dr. Indur Goklany,says that carbon dioxide levels have risen inexorably since the 1700s and in areas where they have never been higher, living standards and life expectancies have improved. Emissions from burning fossil fuels have already had a huge beneficial effect on crops, increasing yields by at least 10-15 percent; increased carbon dioxide concentrations have also increased the productivity of many marine ecosystems while satellite evidence confirms that increased concentrations have resulted in greater productivi8ty of wild terrestrial ecosystems in all vegetation types. Compared with the benefits of carbon dioxide on crop and biosphere productivity, the adverse impacts of carbon dioxide on the frequency and intensity of extreme weather, on seal level, vector-borne disease prevalence and human heath have been too small to measure.
Instead of relying on inefficient biofuels and other “renewables” we must concentrate on using our great stores of coal, gas and oil to meet future needs. These are not only plentiful , and the least expensive energy source we possess, but they increase carbon dioxide needed to expand crop production and improve water use efficiencies.
Perhaps Obama’s rush to destroy our food supply is more akin to the U.N. agenda of population control than it is with preserving the Earth for future generations.
“I’m 100% Democrat myself and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on this issue, and the Republicans took the right side. Climate change is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts. To any unprejudiced person…the facts should be obvious: that the non-climatic effects of carbon dioxide as a sustainer of wildlife and crop plants are enormously beneficial, that the possibly harmful climate effects of carbon dioxide have been greatly exaggerated, and that the benefits clearly outweight the possible damage.” Freeman Dyson, Theoretical Physicist, retired professor at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton