Archive    Search
September 2010

Commentary

Where We Stand On Climate Change

Publication Date: 
September 2009

By Tom Donohue, President and CEO, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
September 29, 2009

While health care continues to grab the lion's share of headlines, there's another major issue we can't afford to lose sight of—climate change. Last week, President Obama committed the United States to action during his remarks to the United Nations. Sens. Barbara Boxer and John Kerry are poised to unveil their plan to address climate change following the House's narrow passage of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill earlier this year. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is still threatening to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act if Congress doesn't act, an approach that almost everyone agrees could be a major disaster. And, of course, special interests continue to jockey for position and influence the debate.

With all of this going on, we want to take this opportunity to explain exactly where the U.S. Chamber stands on this important issue.

The U.S. Chamber continues to support strong federal legislation and a binding international agreement to reduce carbon emissions and address climate change. We believe that in order to succeed, any climate change response must include all major CO2 emitting economies, promote new technologies, emphasize efficiency, ensure affordable energy for families and businesses, and help create American jobs and return our economy to prosperity. Congress should carefully deliberate on and enact legislation that meets these goals.

We also have called upon the United States to join with other nations to negotiate a new international agreement that sets binding CO2 reduction commitments for each nation, while allowing each to devise its own best path to meeting its target.

These are mainstream, commonsense views that are shared by a broad majority of the American people, the business community, and a growing number of Democratic and Republican legislators.

Furthermore, we believe that Congress should set climate change policy through legislation, rather than having the EPA apply existing environmental statutes that were not created to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. This is also the stated position of the president and congressional leaders. EPA, if determined to proceed on its own, should publicly present its finding and answer questions on the limited studies it cited, in keeping with the president's pledge of transparency.

We oppose the Waxman-Markey bill because it is neither comprehensive nor international, and it falls short on moving renewable and alternative technologies into the marketplace and enabling our transition to a lower carbon future. It would also impose carbon tariffs on goods imported into the United States, a move that would almost certainly spur retaliation from global trading partners.

Some in the environmental movement claim that, because of our opposition to a specific bill or approach, we must be opposed to all efforts to reduce greenhouse gases, or that we deny the existence of any problem. They are dead wrong. The Chamber has in its public documents, Hill letters and testimony, as well as dozens of concrete policy recommendations, supported efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere, while keeping our economy healthy.
 
We have vigorously supported the production and use of renewable and alternative energy. We have repeatedly supported tax incentives and credits, appropriations, and stimulus funding to promote the accelerated development of new technologies. We are leading the fight to clear the regulatory, legal, and Not In My Backyard roadblocks that are currently delaying promising wind, solar, nuclear, and other renewable or emissions-free energy projects across the nation.

In short, the Chamber believes in clean energy solutions and remains committed to a strong economy and a healthy environment.

Comments

Steve Juhan 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

There is a competing theory on climate change. Watch the Ben Stein movie Expelled. This explains some of the opposing theories on the subject. (Tucson, AZ)
michael s. fleischer 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I joined the chamber b/c I and my family own 3 small and medium sized businesses. I am a physician in private practive and I also have a stake in a surgery center.

What I have realized, and this is rather dissapointing is that the chamber of commerce in not necessarily fighting for free markets or laissez faire capitalism but it seems to function mainly as a special interest group for small businesspeople.

The COC could be much more effective and persuasive if it and you concentrated its efforts on showing people why government is way to big , too wasteful and too powerfull. How it has eroded our freedoms and stifled our productive capacity, reduced purchasing power of our dollar and destroyed good jobs.

In short the COC would be a much more moral and ethical organisation if it functioned more like the Ayn Rand institute or the Ludwig Von Mises institute and was an advocate of limited government and truely free market capitalism...in the classical liberal or modern libertarian tradition.

Have you ever heard of Von Mises, or Henry Hazlitt, or Murray Rothbard....

If not you might want to read some books by these giants

Thank you

Michael S. Fleischer
Tenafly NJ (tenafly, nj)
Anne 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

We need to STOP the "cap and tax" bill from passing. What else does this fanatical president
have up his sleeve? Maybe he should stay in D.C. instead of flying to Denmark.....and take care of
the more important things like unemployment, the war in Afghanistan and our desperate financial crisis, instead of leaving everything up to Harry
Reid, Nancy Pelosi and his White House Czars!
Thank you Chamber of Commerce for standing up for
all the things we hold sacred in this country!
(Princeton, NJ)
Tim Law 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

Why has the term global warming been changed to "climate change?" This is due to global warming being a crock as it climate change! It is a government power grab, plain and simple! (York, PA)
Dick Roberts 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

Most Americans I talk with are not convinced that global warming is occurring,and they are against any Cap And Trade where only the USA pays for reduced carbon. Personally I have difficulty believing that humans have much effect on the weather. I know the melting of glaciers is occurring, but can it be stopped [or started] by humans? (Lincoln, NE)
W Royal 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

There are many leading scientists today that believe that carbon emissions are not the source of climate change. They believe that the climate naturally heats and cools over time, in cycles - and that it has done so for eons. In fact, many scientists now believe that the heating period has ended and that the current trend in temperature is down - that the earth is actually cooling.

I would respect your organization more if you would do a little research rather than just parroting the administration. You really owe it to your members to research issues like this before you recommend that companies spend millions of dollars correcting behaviors that may, in fact, have no impact. (Atlanta , GA)
mikel mcintosh 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

The bogus findings of the purported scientists promulgating the myth of human caused global warming do not even rate a passing grade grade in a high school science class. The data is flawed or non-existent and the computer models have so many variables that as Dr. Dyson has said, ou can make a mouse into an elephant. (arco, idaho)
Mark Jensen 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I am shocked and disappointed that the USCOC is supporting this ridiculous approach to a "problem" which may not even exist. Further, by the government's own estimation, the net effect of this misguided bill will be to reduce global temperatures by less than 0.5 degrees C by 2050. My goodness, can't we find something better to do with the billions and trillions of dollars that this bill will cost us? The US Chamber should oppose this bill in its entirety. (Modesto, California)
ALLEN OMAN 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

CLIMATE CHANGE IS BASED ON FALSE AND DISHONEST "SCIENCE" THOUSANDS OF WELL RESPECTED EXPERTS AND RESEARCHERS ON WORLD CLIMATE VARIATIONS HAVE COMPLETELY EXPOSED THE FRAUD OF MAN MADE CLIMATE CHANGE. THE CHAMBER'S SUPPORT OF THIS DISTRUCTIVE LEGISLATION IS MORE EVIDENCE THAT YOU DO NOT REPRESENT SMALL BUSINESS OR CONSUMERS. (BEMIDJI, MN. )
Glen 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

Climate change has been happening since the ice age, how do you think all of that ice melted. This another scam of Big Government to take more money out of companies pockets to waste on their millions of dollars for their retirement. Do we really think any other nation is going to control greenhouse gasses. Why is our government not concerned about job creation? All I've seen is politicians paying special intrest groups back for getting them elected and we are the ones paying! (West Jordan, Utah)
Scott Nicholson 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

It is refreshing to see the US CofC be reasonable in their approach to climate change. I hope that is the point of this position paper. There may be a number of unknowns relative to climate change, although I am an environmental engineer, climate is not my field of expertise and we need to rely on those experts during these times - experts unswayed by corporate financing. There are things which should rise above self-interests and this is clearly one of them. (Bosie, ID)
Albert J Segalla 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I have a black and white cat named Shadow. Shadow has piercing green eyes that seem to look into your soul. Shadow has a perpetual expression of amazement on his face and never smiles. I have reason to question this cat’s mental stability.

Recently, I observed Shadow attacking a small object on the carpet. He would leap high in the air and come down with all claws and teeth. The object was doomed – such ferocity!

Naturally, I assumed the object must be a mouse or a bug, but it was actually a chip of wood!

When I pointed this out to Shadow, he became very uneasy and resented my comments. He indicated he had reached a consensus with my other cat, named Brownie, and determined this was not a chip of wood, as I claimed, and that I was a denier of the consensus. As a denier, I was considered antisocial and perhaps even a danger to the cat community.

This reminds me of the climate scare. The proponents of man made earth warming theory (Socialists) claim that increased levels of carbon dioxide cause earth warming. However, the ice core records indicate the opposite. Increased levels of C02 follow earth warming and thus could not cause it. Also, there has been no global warming for 10 years!

To keep the hoax going, they must silence or isolate the scientists who deny their theory. For if they fail, and the hoax gets exposed, the whole plan of socializing America would collapse like a house of cards. This could actually result in our children living in a free and prosperous country. What a novel idea.

In the meantime, Shadow is still attacking chips of wood.
(Copperopolis, CA)
Jason Bergeron 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I believe the light of history will show the global warming/climate change "crisis" as one of the largest scientific frauds ever perpetuated. The Chamber should research this and not support any legislation that will cripple businesses and add to the already over burdensome tax load we are carrying. (Greenville, South Carolina)
David Voss 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

Global warming is a natural occuring cycle, that has to do with the effect our sun has on our planet. It's Big Picture stuff. NOTHING to do with little human specific CO2 production. Anyone that paid attention in the 5th grade knows that Plants (Green) need carbon dioxide(CO2) to live. All animals(including humans) breath in oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide (CO2). So plants get carbon dioxide from any living organis which produces it. Even cute little bunnies and left wing money hungry nut jobs. The fact that a large group of politicians are trying to perpetuate this hoax to increase Big Government revenue should make us all sick. Flush them back where they belong in 2010!
If you still don't agree, then please do your part, and hold your breath, for the environment's sake. (Los Altos Hills, California)
Robert Cross 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

Cap and Tax merely puts a price on non-compliance which will in turn be passed along to consumers and taxpayers. It is time for the USCC to revisit the capitulation to the idea that global warming as "accepted science" is in truth a fact. I remain convinced that global warming is not supported by adequate scientific evidence and that human enterprise as a cause is nothing more than a popular (political) myth. (Wheatland, Wyoming)
Mike 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

Anyone who doesnt know global warming is real hasnt been outside their home in a while. (Hot Springs, AR)
John 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I would suggest the best way the Chamber could make a difference in ensuring an effective and economically vialble climate bill passes is to ask Republican legislators to become involved in the process. You've already taken step one by disassociating yourself from one prominent Republican who called climate change a "hoax". Take the next step by encouraging Republicans to let up on the rhetoric about cap and trade being "cap and tax". After all, it was Republican President George H.W. Bush who pioneered cap and tax -- very successfully - back in 1990. Encourage smart, progressive Republicans to stop the sniping and get share their ideas. If you think the Democrats aren't listening, call them on it. Make them go on defense for a change. I would like to see the Chamber complaining less and standing up for markets more. (Loveland, OH)
Stephen Delphi 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I am deeply concerned that Tom Donohue thru the USCOC would support the politically created crisis of man made global warming. 31,478 American scientists have signed a petition, including 9029 with Ph.D's stating that the scientific methods used to advance this hoax are highly questionable and all legitimate evidence leads to the conclusion that the heating and cooling of the earth are associated only with solar activity.

The USCOC is anything but an advocate for business in the US. If global warming legislation is passed it will do nothing but advance the power and money grab by the ultra liberals and bring about the promised change that President Obama promised- namely to move America away from free market capitalism and into a form of Marxism. In order for that to occur, one important element is the necessity of an overwhelming crises. Thus global warming.

To understand it is necessary to know what Marxism is:

MARXISM is the political philosophy and economic practice based upon a materialist interpretation of history, a critical analysis of capitalism, a theory of social change, and an atheist view of human liberation derived from the work of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels;

Marxist philosophy is three-fold:

The dialectical and materialist concept of history — A society’s history results from its internal conflicts between social classes (bourgeoisie and proletariat), and among the forces of production (technology, labour, institutions); a society's future derives from the developments resulting from said social conflicts.

The critique of capitalism — In a capitalist society, an economic minority (the bourgeoisie) dominate and exploit the working class (proletariat) majority. Per the labor theory of value, under conditions they do not control, workers produce more output, and create more value, than necessary to meet societal needs; with the surplus value (over-production), the capitalists accumulate more wealth and political power.

The theory of revolution — In a capitalist economy, the workers are alienated because they do not control their labour, thus are alienated from society, from the products they make, and from Nature. The solution is uniting in labour unions and political parties, thereby, the workers assume politico-economic power from the bourgeoisie.

Mr. Tom Donohue should immediately be replaced by a free market capitalist who will advocate for business and not for liberal elitist hoaxes.

(Milwaukee , Wisconsin)
Robert Dean 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

Very disappointing to hear the President and CEO of this organization of small businesses accept without question the propaganda of the alarmist left. There is just as much evidence out there that the earth is cooling as warming. There is more evidence that CO2 is a fertilizer than there is that it is a pollutant. If climate change means longer growing seasons and more rainfall I'm all for it. (Vancouver, WA)
Bruce White 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

What Albert Segala said!!
John Bille 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

They are saying the Pacific ocean is cold and we will have the coldest winter in 10 years. does not sound like global warming to me. it is just another way liberals what to control the country (Billerica, MA)
Brian Biggs 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

If the EPA is threatening, why not pass a law that states that Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon Dioxide, and Water Vapor are not harmful and therefore not subject to the Clean Air Act. (Dewey, AZ)
David Jones 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

So, do you want to wait until New York City is underwater before we do anything? The vast majority of the science community is convinced by real evidence that global warming is happening, and unless we act now to alleviate the conditions that are causing it, we will reach a point where the changes will not be reversible. (Chapel Hill, NC)
Jeff G. 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

While it is politically correct to agree with the "consensus" that global warming is established "fact", I have YET TO SEE any scientific studies that properly incorporate radiant energy and sun cycles into the studies. Assumptions have been made which do NOT comply with procedures associated with the scientific method. In addition further assumptions based upon less than necessary amounts of accumulated data suggest that there is NO PROOF to date that any climatological conditions are positively affected by humankind. Since the sun and radiant energy are discounted in the studies, there can BE NO provable experimentation reliably duplicated which is a REQUIRED STANDARD of the scientific method. Based upon pseudo-scientific mania in the mid seventies the media tried to scare the public with the threat of a new ice age!That very story was a Time magazine cover story when I was in high school. Today's global warming scare has been perpetuated by political powers whose agenda is based upon control and upon money and power. I am profoundly disappointed that the US Chamber of Commerce has yielded to the political powers in Washington and allowed themselves to be cowed into supporting this farce which is focused on the destruction of the free market system. At the same time global warming is totally ignored by socialist and communist countries who are more heavily polluting that the United States. The US can NOT affect global change by sacrificing the wealth of our nation to the global warming "gods". Support of any version of "cap and trade" will devastate our economy and will fail to result in climate change. The US Chamber should OPPOSE ALL global warming legislation! (Amarillo, Texas)
Steve S 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

Sounds to me like the USCC needs to listen to it's members and support a policy that promotes economic prosperity and does not perpetuate the myth's perpetrated by Al Gore's personal wealth generating machine. As some note above, how the heck is the US going to compete in the global market if we are the only ones supporting energy polices that add significantly to the cost of doing business. We can't.

Are these polices going to create jobs. No. Are they going to create capital/wealth. No -except for bureaucrats and lawyers.

While there are exceptions, experience and common sense tells us that most business people in America do not want to create a country in which they have to walk around with O2 masks, drink tainted water, eat poisoned food and risk living in an unhealthy environment. For them or their offspring. Generally, we are good at policing ourselves, with some government supervision.

The USCC needs to support the common sense, market driven approach of it members. Otherwise it is going to find its former members can no longer afford to join the USCC. After all, it is the Chamber of COMMERCE, isn't it. (Johnson City, TN)
Mark Herndon 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I am amazed that Mr. Donohue would not do more research before reaching his conclusion. He does not speak for me. I have done my research and concluded that the proponents of climate change are not even thinking of what is best for our globe at all. As the old saying goes, "follow the money" - check into Al Gore's investments. I cannot support Mr. Donohue. (Vero Beach, FL)
PK 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

It’s all about corruption. Global warming has morphed into climate change because the planet has stopped warming and they need some ill-defined fear terminology, that by definition means nothing, to give them the power to cram this tax down our throats. They have to rename cap and trade to something more fear inducing like a clean air bill. We don’t have a war on terror anymore, it’s just a overseas violence contingency force or some such crap. Obama is about change through redefinition. None of it is constitutional, but as Barney Frank says, the constitution is to protect us from government but they are here to help us, so it’s not relevant. They are going to keep pushing this crap until we fold or fight back and waiting for The Chamber or the media to do anything about it is useless. They are only looking to what’s in it for themselves and trust me there is tons of money in these issues for the right people. People who know people, like Goldman Sachs, Geitner, Paulson, Gore and the rest. This is going to make the corruption of the past look like high school stuff. It’s the same thing the mob has been doing for years, skimming. 3% here, 7% there, before long we are talking real money, and the best part is, because they have to collapse the economy to get the power to do it, they are skimming it off of borrowed money. They are stealing from us money we haven’t even made yet. How great is that! (Dallas, TX)
Dennis Detten 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I, too, am appalled that the USCOC would take such a moderate (spineless) view of this hoax called climate change. I joined this organization with the understanding that it protected and promoted capitalism, not junk science. Mr. Donahue's letter is a veiled sell-out to liberals. If Gore's people can get Donahue to bend to their way of thinking, then small business's defenses are further weakened. I'm placing my hopes in Club for Growth or Heritage Foundation. They've manned-up to the fight! (Hereford, TX)
Jason Gailliot 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

The Global Warming/Global Cooling lies are about nothing more than the left's grab for power! They are trying to cripple our businesses and our country by creating the biggest tax ever! Furthermore this tactic of taking an idea that everyone can agree with such as "being green" is a tactic that is well explained in Saul Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals!" It is a bait and switch to gain popular support for an issue that everyone can agree to then morph it into support for a whole different cause! (Murrieta, CA)
T. J. 10/12/2009 3:10:21 AM

I must admit I was very alarmed that the USCOC was "buying in" on this non-issue. I have been equally heartened by the vast majority of my fellow members BLASTING the Chamber for it's foolish decision. I feel we should promote Nuke, Wind, and Solar energy production as quickly as possible, however we (the US) are a pimple on an elephant compared with other greenhouse gas producers. Unless action is global, it's just another effort to"level" the international playing field and hurt US business.

Tom, I think you need to dust off your resume. You don't represent the vast majority of us anymore.
Thanks (Geneva, Fl.)
PK 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

Oh and I just wanted to be clear. Are we also now considered to be racists if we are against climate change legislation like if we are against healthcare reform. And for the idiot complaining about the lack of Republican participation, I suppose you consider someone a snob if they don’t show up for your party even though you might have failed to invite them. No amendments that republicans have offered on any bill have even been allowed to come to a vote and most of the bills have come out of closed Democratic committees without any Republican allowed to participate. This is rich. Obama and his supporters are every bit as centrist as Hugo Chavez. They will be talking about freedom as they close the Fox news down. The world will bleed for the sake of economic justice. As Obama has said, reparations would never provide the economic and social justice he could envision. Oh no, this will last much longer and cut much deeper. (Dallas, TX)
Carlos F. Poza 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

We can and should pursue having it all. Our country is blessed with multiple sources of clean energy, and we should be ready to explore and employ every viable source, including those more innovative forms, which may require temporary government support of one kind or the other. This is also a wonderful opportunity to assess the status of the national grid with a fresh, solutions-oriented mindset.
Energy is key to competitiveness, employment generation and future prosperity. We should keep the dialogue at the technical/economic dimension and stay away from ideological or political party positions. Thank you. (Falls Church, Virginia)
LeRoy 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

Climate change is good. It won't be good for New york, New Orleans or any coastal cities but I live at 7500 ft and I would think the added temp. would help us and a lot of the northern latitudes. I really beleave if we had a climate change , oh sorry I guess the planet has gone threw cycles of cold and hot? before. It would help some people and not others. I guess we want to help the new york crowd? Not (Alamosa , Colo)
mike m 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

you need to get off this al gore kick of global warming or climate change or what ever / go talk to his 65 scientists that he paid and they will back him up / then go talk to the 35000 scientists that really know what they are talking about and they will call him a lier which he and obummer are / ya'll have a nice day (Irving, Tx)
Mike D 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

I am glad to see that most people at least in this forum believe like myself that global warming/climate change whatever they are calling it today is a natural event. If it weren't then please explain the ice age and how did all that ice melt before we even inhabited this planet. As David Voss said anyone that paid attention in 5th grade learned that plants require carbon dioxide to live and thrive (Pleasanton, Ca)
H Hess 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

Man-made climate change is the great fraud of our time. It is remarkable the way that the media and many politicans have come to simply accept this voodoo science -- and be willing to shift power and tax the US into a second rate economic power. Our children and grandchildren will only be able to read about that time when the United States was great and prosperous. (Salt Lake City, UT)
Ed Hammerli 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

It seems that people really do believe what they want to believe, which is conveniently easy for them, and consider the majority of international scientific study a "croc". It would be nice if they were right. (Thibodaux, Louisiana)
Carlene Gauler 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

Climate changes happens, it has been happening as long as the earth has been. It is just another way for the liberals to take from the rest of us working idiots. When you can sell make believe carbon footprints which is air, and make a fortune, why not do it. Wake up America or we may not still be here in a few years! (Georgetown, SC)
Dick Bebernitz 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

Climate change is another great American hoax. All you have to do is follow the money. Again, our Federal Government is taking authority that it does not constitutionally have. But then, our current law makers don't follow that document anyway. This is the real problem. (Ontario, NY)
Kenneth G Enochs SR 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

This issue like so many others is surrounded by economic forces of enormous gain. There are as many proponents and opinions against this issue and there are for it. One must ask himself the following question. I know why the proponents who will gain from this are fighting so vigorously. But, why are those who essentially have nothing or very little to gain fighting for this? The answer must be, one side lacks integrity and the other side is busting at the seams with it. We appear to have lost our moral compass but fear not there are those out there who will steer in the direct they want you to go. SOLUTION:
Congress and the Senate should not be careers. Like the wise founding fathers who left their occupation served their term and return back to their occupation. There was no time to establish economic connections only enough to get things done. If you didn’t you would be shammed when you returned
(West Chester, PA)
Eusebio Andres 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

I am glad that the Chamber holds a real position regarding the problem of the Global Warming.
If this is not real how come we see on TV a thousand program about how the Climate Change is affecting our planet and not even one talking against it?
What else have to happens for us to open our eyes?
Katrina may look like a baby compared to the monster of a overheated planet.
(Miramar, Fl)
Janet Smartt 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

Quote "solar, nuclear, and other renewable or emissions-free energy projects across the nation."

Nuclear is neither renewable nor emissions-free. The production of the materials (concrete), maintenance of these plants, transportation of spent fuel, and storage of nuclear waste is a poor environmental choice for our children, grandchildren, and their grandchildren. Let's not give them the gift of nuclear waste that could cause another disaster and/or leak into air or groundwater when the holding tanks eventually deteriorate. (Berkeley, California)
Kim H 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

As soon as Tom Donohue leaves his PAID Board position outside of the chamber, and reliquishes his obvious conflict of interest, I MAY start to take any position the Chamber as a serious, sound stance. Follow the SCIENCE, don't be lead by the nose by those who are being lead SOLELY by their wallets, including those with us in the chamber. Republicans, Democrats, conservatives, liberals, theories, opposing theories, whatever! You cannot deny that pollutants and other things we have introduced into our world these last couple hundred years cannot possibly be healthy for the earth and therefore living beings! Which, by the way, means it is ultimately UNHEALTHY for BUSINESS! ALL BUSINESS! Let's think a little farther than the end of our own noses! Drop the outrage and hysteria, get out of the "what's in it for me?" mindset that more and more Americans seem to have lately and think, really think about what we are passing along to each other today and to those who come after us. WE DON'T JUST HAVE "DOMINION OVER THE EARTH AND ITS CREATURES", WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO THE EARTH AND ITS CREATURES! (FL)
Glenn Frank 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

Climate change is questionable as to whether it is even happening. And it sure as heck is not man made. Man has done more (and should continue to) find clean responsible ways of consuming energy including looking at other sources that make sense. But lets not ignore the fact that natural gas, coal, wind, solar, oil, nuclear all are viable sources and many of them are in abundance and All are renewable. We have to take into consideration cost of acquistion thought too. Every source has pros and cons, none of them are perfect including wind and solar. Man has not contributed to carbon emissions as much as we have reduced it. Can you imagine if we never used any oil or natural gas? It would just bubble up or spew from the ground or the ocean floor potentially doing more harm. Can you imaging if man werent around to put out the wild fires that start on thier own and would end up catching these natural fuel sources on fire what kind of "carbon foot print" that makes! What about Volcanoes and other natural producing carobon emitters... animals, people, etc. Global warming is a HOAX and a fear tactic to control money. Plain and simple. (Fort Collins, CO)
Glenn Frank 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

Climate change is questionable as to whether it is even happening. And it sure as heck is not man made. Man has done more (and should continue to) find clean responsible ways of consuming energy including looking at other sources that make sense. But lets not ignore the fact that natural gas, coal, wind, solar, oil, nuclear all are viable sources and many of them are in abundance and All are renewable. We have to take into consideration cost of acquistion thought too. Every source has pros and cons, none of them are perfect including wind and solar. Man has not contributed to carbon emissions as much as we have reduced it. Can you imagine if we never used any oil or natural gas? It would just bubble up or spew from the ground or the ocean floor potentially doing more harm. Can you imaging if man werent around to put out the wild fires that start on thier own and would end up catching these natural fuel sources on fire what kind of "carbon foot print" that makes! What about Volcanoes and other natural producing carobon emitters... animals, people, etc. Global warming is a HOAX and a fear tactic to control money. Plain and simple. (Fort Collins, CO)
Alec 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

There you go again Tom! The flat earth society is alive and well in the "Human Caused Climate Change Scam". First, CFCs and the ozone issue - then the refrigerant industries came up with Puron. The left lost a revenue source on that one. Next, it was global warming caused by CO2. Now that the numbers don't support warming, you call it Climate Change, as if that means anything substantive. You fail to point out that nearly every scientist that has signed on to the Warming or Change doctrine is supported by a grant from someone to make the case, or at least to keep the money coming in. If they debunked the myth, the money would stop, since there would be no crisis, no need to continue to fund the studies, and hundreds of scientists would need to find other crises to chase. Then they would need to rewrite funding requests for some other difficult-to-prove disaster waiting to happen, and that would be much more difficult, especially when they have found the perfect culprit for the cause.

The CO2 scam is brilliant in that it is all encompassing, since everyone, and every industry including the soft drink industry either needs CO2 or produces it. That makes it the ideal taxable commodity that escapes no one except the government. Pure genius, but it is evil. I should re-think my membership in the Chamber. (Mobile, AL)
Ervon Fairbanks 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

I am what the global warming extremests call a denier. I do not believe that humans are causing global warming. During the past two years I have been reading a lot about climate change and I have accummulated a mini library of books written by climate scientists and all of these books are published since 2007 so they represent up to date science. If I have learned anything about climate science it is that our planet's climate is very large and complex and that climate change occurs over very long periods of time. I have had the opportunity to listen to several climate scientists and I will say that scientists generally agree that our planet is warming. However, I have not heard a single scientist say that global warming is crtical. Every scientist I have listened to has always ended his lecture with the statement, "We do not believe we are seeing and climate patterns today that have not accurred in the past. Consider the composition of the atmosphere. The atmosphere is composed of Nitrogen, 78.08%; Oxygen, 20.94%; Argon, .93%; and Carbon Dioxide, Helium, Hydrogen, and Xenon combined, .05% Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere is only a trace gas. Referring to an article in the February 2004 National Geographic it states, "Nearly a hundred billions tons of carbon diffuse back and forth between ocean and atmosphere." "Each year humanity dumps roughly 8 billion metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere." "Compared with these vast natural exchanges, the few billion tons of carbon that humans contribute to the atmosphere each year seem paltry." Referring to Alaska, "Right now global warming, ironically, may be helping forstall even more warming, by speeding the growth of carbon absorbing trees. Now the winters are warmer, wetter, and slushier. The shrubs on the North Slope seem to love the change, and it has been found that the lusher forage gives newborn caribou a better shot at survival."

Howard C. Hayden a professor emiritus of physics at the University of Connecticut published in 2008 "A Primer on CO2 and Climate." He virtually reiterates the National Graphic. In his book he publishes a table of some sources of atmospheric CO2. He shows CO2 emmissions from the oceans to be ninty billion tons. Emmissions from dying and decaying forests and vegetation around the world to be 60 billion tons. Without putting numbers to them he also lists volcanoes and forest fires around the world as significant contributers of CO2 into the atmosphere. He states,"man's emissions through fossil burning are puny--only 3% to 4% of the natural emmissions.

Ice cores from Vostock Antarctica contradict the theory that human emmissions of CO2 into the atmoshpere cause golobal warming. The ice cores show just the opposite. The ice cores show that the warming leads the increase in carbon dioxide. Scientists have discovered that as the oceans cool they absorb CO2 and when they warm they release CO2. And because the oceans are so large and massive the cooling and warming of the oceans follows the cooling and warming of the atmosphere. Scientists have drawn the analogy that the oceans act similar to a bottle of pop. The atmosphere warms, the oceans warm at a slower rate, and they give up their CO2 after the atmosphere has warmed. Thus the answer to why the ice cores show warming and then increased amounts of atmospheric CO2. In fact a lot of scientists are beginning to say that the small amount of CO2 in the atmosphere does not drive climate change at all.

Two scientists at the University of Alaska Geophysical Institute have published a book, "The Climate of Alaska." I quote "Various gases in the atmosphere create what is termed the "greenhouse effect," without which the eaarth's surface temperature would not be well suited for life." They go on to say, "Although CO2 is the greenhouse gas most frequently referenced in the popular media, it is water vapor that has the greatest radiative influence as an absorber and emitter. In other words water vapor is a greater contributor to global warming than is CO2. To quote further. "The primary tool used by climate change researchers is the global climate model. Models use sets of mathematical equations that represent the atmosphere numerically. By using models, certain parts of the climate system can be "forced" in various ways, such as reducing sea ice cover or increasing greenhouse gases and the model is run to see how the atmosphere would respond." The scientist can have a great deal of influence on the model just by the equations he writes and the numerical values he chooses to give to the model. There are a multitude of questions related to climate models which I will not go into, but one problem scientists continue to work on is the correct repre (Skagway, Alaska)
Bob Hysong 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

"GLOBAL WARMING" and "CAP & TAX" are scams. These two initiatives are promoted by the liberal big government lobbies to foster more big government programs. The earth has cooled or stayed the same for the last 11 years. Meteorologists predict this winter will be the coldest since 1983. CAP & TAX will send more of our manufacturing jobs to countries with less environmental standards than we currently have which in turn will produce more carbon in the atmosphere. (Temecula, CA)
Guy Ponti 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

It never ceases to amaze me that successful and educated people can actually buy in to this B.S. There is more than enough data to refute claims of the "man made" global warmers. In addition,to believe that our actions are going to influence the actions of the Chinese and Indians (1/2 of the world population) is farcical at best. Why would we wish to self impose limitations on ourselves in this scenario. Proper stewardship and use of our resources does not necessarily require the reactionary efforts Al Gore Globakl Weenies. (Tallahassee, Florida)
Russ Davis 10/12/2009 3:10:22 AM

At 25% China is the number 1 contributor to CO2. What’s more, India is number 2. While the U.S. is suffering negative growth, China is growing by 8%. In the case of China and India, they have stated they will not play in the greenhouse gas sandbox. At the same time, NASA has the SOHO spacecraft monitoring the sun, and there are currently fewer sunspots. While visible light is reduced by a fraction of 1%, this is a very small part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Indeed, the ultraviolet spectrum is down by 6%. This is the high energy light that is dominant in any reasonable analysis. This looks like a replay of the Freon argument where there was a hole in the Ozone layer over the South Pole (not the North which is surrounded by the industrial countries of the world). Few questioned the pseudo science posited. Readers may recall at one time Physics taught the emptiness of space contained “Ether,” necessary to transmit light waves. At another time, science taught the Earth was the center of the universe. Yet in another example, Walter Freeman has a solution for brain disorders. In each example, questioning the science was considered ad you your career path. We have “Global Wqarming.” (Fairfax, VA)

Post new comment

To have your comment considered for reprint in the U.S. Chamber's monthly print publication, Free Enterprise, please include your city and state below.
Please type your comment in the box below. (Please do not include HTML code.)