Phil Drietz: We should not impose a carbon tax
Summary: Reader says U.S. should not impose a carbon tax.
The Nov. 14 “Minnesota Opinion” editorial proposes we should impose a carbon tax on power plants and then distribute the money monthly their to customers as an incentive to reduce CO2 emissions, and thereby reduce the harm from climate change.
A Minnesota member of Citizens Climate Lobby calls this a win-win situation. The lobby says this action would reduce CO2 emissions to 50% of 1990 levels by the year 2035.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency:; power plant sulfur emissions dropped 92%, nitrogen oxides by 85%, CO2 by 18% from 1995 to 2019,
In just one year (2018-19) sulfur dropped 23%, NOx 14%, CO2 8%, mercury 13%. Power generation dropped 3% during this period.
Power plants have spent billions to make these pollution reductions. According to EPA. they are now running at about 48% of capacity, many have shut down.
So now we should slap a carbon tax on them?
For what? — a “climate change” slogan based on fake science?
A 2020 Bloomberg article said the COVID-19 pandemic brought down air pollution due to drop in fossil fuel usage; but had no effect on rising atmospheric CO2 levels.
I’ve been writing letters to the editor in opposition to the notion of “Man-made’ global warming” for about a dozen years.
One thing I notice is that supporters of “Man-made CO2 causing global warming” don’t seem to want to follow up with basic science principles explaining how man’s tiny contribution of CO2 to nature’s huge CO2 budget, forces the entire globe to heat up when it has to go against much more powerful natural processes such as water vapor distribution, solar energy absorption/reflection, volcanism, etc.
In summary; the whole concept of “Man-made global warming” is beginning to look as phony as evolution.